The Supreme Court on Thursday urged members of the Kapur family to resolve their escalating inheritance and trust dispute amicably, reminding them that 'we all came with empty hands and we have to go with empty hands,' while cautioning all sides against aggravating the ongoing conflict over the estate of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, as per a report by Bar and Bench.
A bench comprising Justices J. B. Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observations while hearing a fresh plea filed by Rani Kapur, the 80-year-old mother of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur. She has alleged that she was deprived of her legacy, estate, and home through what she describes as a fraudulent trust instrument. The bench had previously remarked that the scale and bitterness of the dispute made even the 'Mahabharat look small.'
Who are the parties involved in this case?
At the centre of the dispute is the RK Family Trust, also referred to in court filings as the Rani Kapur Family Trust. According to Rani Kapur, although the trust purportedly lists her as both settlor and trustee, it makes Priya Sachdev Kapur, wife of Sunjay Kapur, and others the sole beneficiaries, effectively excluding her and other members of the Kapur family. Rani Kapur has alleged that after she suffered a stroke in 2017, her late son Sunjay Kapur and his wife Priya Kapur exploited her physical condition and trust. She further claims that while she was unwell, her properties and shareholdings were quietly moved into a family trust without her knowledge or proper consent. She also alleges that she was made to sign several documents, including blank papers, by being told it was just routine paperwork, when in reality those signatures were being used to transfer her assets away from her. The dispute intensified after Sunjay Kapur's death in June last year, after which Rani Kapur alleged that Priya Kapur moved swiftly to assume control over key Sona Group entities, leaving her with nothing.
What triggered Thursday's hearing?
The latest round of litigation arose after a notice dated May 8 called for a board meeting of Raghuvanshi Investment Private Limited (RIPL), an entity that controls a substantial portion of the disputed estate, scheduled for May 18. Rani Kapur argued that the meeting was convened barely 24 hours after the Supreme Court referred the family dispute to mediation before former Chief Justice of India D. Y. Chandrachud on May 7. At the outset of Thursday's hearing, the bench questioned why yet another plea had been filed despite mediation already being underway. 'Why are you again here? If you all are not interested in mediation, we will not waste any time and we will hear it,' the bench said, warning that repeated court interventions would only complicate the mediation process.
What did the court decide on the board meeting?
The Supreme Court declined to stay the board meeting altogether. However, it directed that two specific agenda items — the appointment of two independent directors and changes in bank account signatories — should not be taken up for discussion during the meeting. Senior Advocate Navin Pahwa, appearing for Rani Kapur, had argued that the proposed meeting was designed to ensure she was 'completely drowned out' in the management of family assets. On the question of independent directors, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the respondents, informed the court that the Reserve Bank of India had conducted an inspection and directed that two independent directors be appointed by May 21. The Supreme Court addressed this by directing that RBI directives and statutory compliances need not be insisted upon by the RBI or other statutory authorities for now.
Court's appeal for reconciliation
The bench stressed the need for meaningful participation in mediation and urged the family not to approach the process with hostility. Referring to Rani Kapur's age, the court observed: 'She is an 80-year-old woman. We all came with empty hands and we have to go with empty hands. All we carry is our souls. There has to be a will to settle the matter. Don't go before the mediator with a heavy heart just because the court has pushed you. Each one of you try.' The court cautioned that if parties were unwilling to mediate sincerely, it could proceed to hear the dispute on merits instead. The dispute has also drawn in Bollywood actor Karisma Kapoor — Sunjay Kapur's former wife — through her two children. On April 30, the Delhi high court allowed an interim injunction plea filed by Karisma Kapoor's children and restrained Priya Sachdev Kapur from creating any third-party rights over the assets left behind by Sunjay Kapur. Parallel proceedings over control of the estate and assets are also pending before the Delhi high court. At an earlier hearing, the Supreme Court had already urged the parties to explore mediation, observing that a prolonged inheritance battle involving an 80-year-old litigant would serve little purpose. The case is now at a critical juncture with mediation underway.
