NEW DELHI: Calling it a "bogus challenge" to the will of late businessman Sunjay Kapur, his wife Priya on Wednesday told Delhi high court that incorrect spellings or addresses can't be grounds to invalidate the document.
Rebutting the allegations levelled by Kapur's ex-wife and actor Karisma Kapoor 's children that the will was forged, Priya's counsel, senior advocate Rajiv Nayyar , told the court that no one had disputed or denied Sunjay's signatures or those of the other two witnesses.
The only ground to challenge the will, he told Justice Jyoti Singh , was if the deceased was not of sound mind, was under coercion, or was under some inability to execute the will. He told HC there was "nothing unusual in the bequest" since "in wife vs wife he would obviously name the present wife as beneficiary over an estranged wife". The plea of the plaintiffs, Samaira and Kiaan Raj, was bereft of any cause of action, he argued.
"Now I am told there are four additional grounds to invalidate a will - wrong spelling, wrong address, writing testatrix instead of testator, and closeness of witnesses," Nayyar said, adding the existence of the will was disclosed to all on July 30.
"There were two opportunities for the plaintiff. There was a will reading. It was read out to everyone, including the plaintiff... The suit was filed on Sept 9. There is no reference or challenge to the will in the plaint. The will was shared with them on Sept 15. They were conscious of the existence of the will as far back as July 30, prior to the filing of the suit. Today we are dealing with a non-existent challenge to the will. It's a bogus challenge," he said.
HC will resume hearing in the matter on Friday.
Rebutting the allegations levelled by Kapur's ex-wife and actor Karisma Kapoor 's children that the will was forged, Priya's counsel, senior advocate Rajiv Nayyar , told the court that no one had disputed or denied Sunjay's signatures or those of the other two witnesses.
The only ground to challenge the will, he told Justice Jyoti Singh , was if the deceased was not of sound mind, was under coercion, or was under some inability to execute the will. He told HC there was "nothing unusual in the bequest" since "in wife vs wife he would obviously name the present wife as beneficiary over an estranged wife". The plea of the plaintiffs, Samaira and Kiaan Raj, was bereft of any cause of action, he argued.
"Now I am told there are four additional grounds to invalidate a will - wrong spelling, wrong address, writing testatrix instead of testator, and closeness of witnesses," Nayyar said, adding the existence of the will was disclosed to all on July 30.
"There were two opportunities for the plaintiff. There was a will reading. It was read out to everyone, including the plaintiff... The suit was filed on Sept 9. There is no reference or challenge to the will in the plaint. The will was shared with them on Sept 15. They were conscious of the existence of the will as far back as July 30, prior to the filing of the suit. Today we are dealing with a non-existent challenge to the will. It's a bogus challenge," he said.
HC will resume hearing in the matter on Friday.
You may also like
"People of Bihar will surely move forward with new resolve for victory": MP CM Mohan Yadav
Lewis Hamilton left Brad Pitt 'not impressed' with brave comment at private dinner
'I was on BBC Celebrity Traitors and this is who will win £100,000'
Apple Music's biggest refresh yet brings lyrics translation, AutoMix, and more
Bavuma Named In SA 'A' Squad For Second Game Against India 'A' Ahead Of Test Series
