The defense maintained that the Will is backed by a complete and uninterrupted evidentiary chain, digital metadata, contemporaneous emails, WhatsApp read-receipts, sworn affidavits and the consistent testimony of both attesting witnesses and none of which has been contradicted by any material on record. They argued that insinuations about personal relationships cannot override the documentary proof of due execution.
Justice Jyoti Singh had previously cautioned against turning the courtroom into a stage for melodrama. The defence reiterated that the validity of a Will cannot be assessed on emotional narratives, retrospective grievances or shifting family equations. The legal test remains singular: whether the document was executed in accordance with law.
Addressing today’s allegation that estrangement made Priya an unlikely beneficiary, the defence pointed to Sunjay Kapur’s own lifetime decisions. His personal accounts and financial instruments consistently nominated Priya as the sole beneficiary. His children, in contrast, were already comprehensively protected through the court-approved divorce settlement and the RK Family Trust, where they hold a beneficial interest exceeding ₹2,400 crore. With his children secured for life, Sunjay’s decision on how to distribute his personal estate was his alone.
Earlier hearings have made it clear that the plaintiffs’ narrative has shifted repeatedly from claiming there was no Will, to raising typographical objections, to suddenly disputing the signature. The defence characterized this conduct as an attempt to reframe the dispute each time the previous theory collapses under evidence. It has also been argued that the plaintiffs’ actions after Sunjay’s passing reflected an exclusive focus on the Trust, not the Will – behavior that the defence described as the conduct of parties seeking more despite already receiving significant benefits.
Arguments earlier in the week stressed that no factual or legal basis has been presented to invalidate the Will, only assumptions stretched into suspicion. The defense noted that today’s argument based on alleged estrangement is simply the latest attempt to inject emotion into a matter governed strictly by statutory requirements.
Concluding submissions, the defense urged the court to remain anchored in the record, the Will was drafted, executed, and circulated transparently, and every material step is verified through objective digital evidence. Family tensions, however dramatic, cannot override compliance with law.
Defense Rebuts ‘Estrangement Theory’, Says It’s a Smokescreen for Family Politics.
The Delhi High Court on Thursday witnessed a new line of argument from the counsel for Defendant No. 3, who attempted to question the validity of late Sunjay Kapur’s Will by suggesting that alleged marital discord made Priya Kapur an improbable beneficiary. The defense, however, countered this narrative as a legally irrelevant smokescreen designed to shift focus from hard evidence to family politics.
