A petition filed by Karisma in the Delhi High Court challenges Priya’s handling of Sunjay’s personal assets and adds to the disputes already surrounding the estate. Sunjay’s mother, Rani Kapur, and sister, Mandhira Kapur, have also raised questions about how events unfolded after the former Sona Comstar chairperson’s death.

On Wednesday, Rani Kapur, mother of late Sona Comstar chairman Sunjay Kapur, Karisma Kapoor and her children in challenging the validity of his Will before the Delhi High Court. She argued that she had been entirely excluded from the estate and sought a status quo on his assets

Mint reviewed the court filings and recent company records to trace how the family’s disagreements over succession and corporate control have come to the fore.

From London to New Delhi

Sunjay died in London earlier this year. Days later, Karisma and her children Samaira and Kiaan travelled to England, during 14-17 June, to meet Priya. During that visit, the petition says, Priya repeatedly told them Sunjay had left no Will and that his assets were housed entirely under the RK Family Trust.

“This fact was reiterated several times thereafter when the plaintiffs or their mother met or spoke to the Defendant No 1 (Priya),” the petition filed in Delhi High Court reads.

The RK Family Trust controls Aureus Investment Pvt. Ltd, the promoter entity of Sona Comstar. The trust owns 65% of Aureus, which in turn holds a 28% stake in Sona Comstar.

Corporate filings show that after Sunjay’s death, the trust listed four beneficiary owners: Priya, her son Azarias, and Sunjay’s children with Karisma – Samaira and Kiaan. Through this ownership, Priya joined Aureus to take Sunjay’s place, and on 20 June was appointed its managing director at an extraordinary general meeting.

By early July, attention shifted to Sona Comstar’s annual general meeting, set for 25 July. Priya asked Karisma for Samaira and Kiaan to attend and submit trust-related documents. A week later, she abruptly said their presence was no longer needed, without explanation, according to the petition.

“Defendant No. 1 (Priya) called and informed the plaintiffs’ mother that there was no requirement to attend the AGM. No reason was given for the same,” the petition says.

On 24 July, Sunjay’s mother Rani Kapur wrote to Sona Comstar’s board opposing Priya’s appointment as a director and urging a delay of the AGM. The company pressed ahead, dismissing her objection on the grounds she had no stake. At the meeting, Priya was approved as a director.

A sudden Will

On the day of the AGM, Priya and Karisma agreed to schedule a meeting with their legal advisers to discuss matters of the family trust. On 26 July, the two exchanged messages to confirm the timing and participants, which included directors of Aureus and Shweta Suri Marwah, managing director of Subros and executor of Sunjay Kapur’s estate.

The petition claims this was the first sign of suspicious behaviour from Priya. In one message, she referred to an “executor for this process,” wording that raised doubts about whether the meeting was solely about the trust.

“The plaintiffs or their mother could not understand as to what was being referred to as the ‘executor for this process’ and assumed it to mean that there is a person for executing the process relating to the Trust. Now, it transpires that the words ‘executor for this process’ were deliberately used without reference to any will,” the petition says.

Despite those concerns, relations between the two families still appeared cordial. In another message the same day, Priya invited Karisma to arrive early with Samaira and Kiaan so the children could spend time with her son Azarias before the meeting. Karisma agreed.

On 30 July, the families, their advisers, and Marwah met at the Taj Mansingh Hotel in New Delhi to review the trust and Sunjay’s assets. Forms for the children’s beneficiary ownership were handed over.

It was also at this meeting, the petition says, that Karisma and her children were shown for the first time a Will of Sunjay Kapur—dated March 21—which left all of his personal estate to Priya.

Karisma and her children, however, have questioned its authenticity. Although Shweta Suri Marwah was listed as executor, the petition claims she only learned of the Will on 29 July from Aureus directors Dinesh Agarwal and Nitin Sharma.

“The manner and speed in which the said document was purported to be read, it was difficult to comprehend the effect and terms of the same, unless one saw / read it carefully and examined it legally. Neither a copy of the Alleged Purported Will was provided nor shown to the Plaintiffs or to their mother,” the petition says.

The petition further alleges that before the Will was disclosed, the children and their mother were asked to sign a confidentiality agreement. When they refused, Karisma contends, Priya’s attitude toward them shifted.

Rising tensions

In early August, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs recorded beneficiary ownership forms for Priya and her son Azarias, but not for Karisma’s children, Samaira and Kiaan.

On 22 August, Karisma wrote to Marwah on behalf of Kiaan, seeking a copy of the Will and questioning why it had not been disclosed earlier.

“Prior to the meeting (on 30 July), I was informed that the discussions were related to documentation pertaining to the RK Family Trust of which Kiaan Kapur and Samaira Kapur are beneficiaries,” she wrote. “During the course of the meeting, to our surprise we were for the first time informed by you of the existence of a last Will and Testament purported to have been signed by Mr. Sunjay Kapur on 21st March, 2025.”

But on 26 August, Marwah declined to share the document. Instead, she told Karisma that, “Based on the reading of the Will. as it presently stands, neither you nor the children including Master Kiaan Kapur ( represented by yourself as legal guardian) are beneficiaries under the Will.”

“As the Will is a confidential and private document, I am unable to provide you with a copy. However, for the sake of transparency, you may inspect the Will at my counsel’s office…at any convenient and reasonable time mutually agreed, subject to your signing a declaration of confidentiality prior to such inspection,” Marwah wrote.

The petition counters that Sunjay never disclosed the existence of such a Will despite frequent contact with his children. During 15-18 March, he took Kiaan on a trip to Goa and later to Delhi to visit his mother, Rani Kapur. In the months before his death, he also discussed seeking Portuguese citizenship for himself and both children, requesting their documents. At no point, the petition claims, did he suggest that his entire estate would be left to Priya.

Samaira and Kiaan’s beneficiary ownership forms finally appeared in MCA records in early September.

On 8 September, Karisma again wrote on Kiaan’s behalf, objecting to Marwah’s conditional inspection process, arguing that as Sunjay’s legal heirs the children were entitled to full access. That same day, Karisma filed a petition in the Delhi High Court, seeking a fair division of Sunjay’s personal estate between his children.

Queries sent to Priya on Tuesday remained unanswered till press time.