News

What began as a routine inheritance dispute is now spiralling into a courtroom thriller that could redefine one of India’s most expensive family battles.

Late Tuesday night, as Delhi slept, alleged call detail records linked to Priya Kapur — the third wife of the late auto-components tycoon Sunjay Kapur — exploded across social media. Within hours, prime-time television was ablaze. The reason: the data appeared to place Priya’s mobile phone in New Delhi, not Gurugram, on 21 March 2025 — the very day she has sworn, under oath before the Delhi High Court, that she was physically present during the execution of Sunjay Kapur’s controversial Will.

That single contradiction has sent shockwaves through a case involving an estate estimated at Rs30,000 crore.

In her affidavit, Priya Kapur asserted her presence at a key moment — a claim that underpins her version of how Sunjay Kapur’s final testament came into existence. But if the circulating electronic trail is accurate and later admitted by the court, it would directly contradict a sworn statement. Legal experts say such inconsistencies are not mere technicalities; they strike at the heart of credibility.

“When an affidavit clashes with electronic evidence, courts become extremely cautious,” noted Advocate Swapnil Kothari. “Even one unexplained inconsistency can force judges to re-examine the entire narrative.”

The timing could not be more explosive.

For months, filings submitted on behalf of Sunjay Kapur’s children — Samaira and Kiaan — have been quietly raising doubts about the Will itself. Those documents point to spelling errors, incorrect pronouns used for the testator, and internal contradictions in a document said to govern a global business empire. Alone, such errors might pass. Together, critics argue, they begin to look less like oversight and more like warning signs.

Senior Advocate Ashok Paranjpe put it bluntly: in wills of this magnitude, “the paperwork must be spotless.” Witnesses who actually saw the signing, he stressed, are non-negotiable. Adding another layer of complexity, family law expert Mrunalini Deshmukh clarified that a beneficiary need not be present at the execution of a will — a statement that has only sharpened questions about why Priya Kapur would emphasise her presence so strongly, if it were not legally required.

That question now hangs heavily in the air.

Was the affidavit overstated? Was there a mistake? Or does the alleged digital trail tell a story the court has yet to hear?

As Advocate Prem Rajani observed, when estates of this scale are at stake, judges scrutinise every word, every document, every surrounding circumstance. Precision matters. Consistency matters. Intent matters.

The Delhi High Court will ultimately decide what is admissible, what is credible, and what is fiction. But for now, the convergence of alleged call records, expert opinion, and long-standing objections has transformed a family dispute into a legal suspense drama — one where the smallest signal ping could prove decisive.