Indus Valley Times

By Our Correspondent

New Delhi, Dec. 1: In proceedings held  before the Delhi High Court on 27 November 2025 ,  concerning the estate of late Mr. Sunjay Kapur, Senior Advocate Anuradha Dutt, appearing for Mrs. Shradha Suri, the Executor of the Will, issued a ‘firm rebuttal’ to insinuations questioning her role and motives in the testamentary matter.

Dutt emphasised that Suri is a fully independent professional, running one of NCR’s top-ranked educational institutions. “I have my own business. I run a successful auto parts business and a school which is one of the top NCR schools. Why are we doing all this?” she submitted, underscoring that any suggestion of personal gain or dependency is factually incorrect.

On the question of nomination and inheritance, the Court was reminded that Mr. Kapur chose his wife, Mrs. Priya Kapur, as the sole nominee on his personal accounts, a lawful and common decision. Any presumption that a wife should not receive personal wealth, counsel submitted, reflects a “RETROGRADE MINDSET.”

To address alleged suspicious circumstances, the Court was taken through contemporaneous email records. On 14 June, it was the executor herself who pointed out that the wrong document had been shared inadvertently; the correct Will was then immediately provided. Later, on 15 June and 24 June, she sought a certified copy and received the original Will from the custodian, demonstrating transparency from Day-One.

Counsel further noted that an executor may become aware of their appointment subsequently, and efforts to seek legal assistance or understand duties cannot be treated as improper.

Regarding the 30 July meeting, where plaintiffs alleged the Will was read ‘in a hurry,’ the defense pointed out that such a claim surfaced only on 22 August, despite plaintiffs being legally represented by Sr. Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani at the meeting. The plaintiffs conveniently remember three important aspects of the Will; the date of execution, the two witness names, and that they were excluded. The delay, counsel argued, undermines the credibility of that allegation.

The executor also clarified that offering inspection of the Will under an NDA, a step later endorsed by the Court, only reinforces her bona fides.

Finally, Adv. Dutt emphasised that the Will’s signatures and execution remain undisputed, and allegations of conspiracy are entirely unsupported. As she noted, the law is settled, only the testamentary court may examine the validity of a Will, and no suspicious circumstances in its execution have been demonstrated.

“The focus must remain on law and evidence,” counsel submitted, urging that baseless conjecture should not cloud judicial scrutiny.

The matter is scheduled to be heard again on 1 December 2025