‘We all come empty-handed’: Supreme Court asks warring factions not to disrupt mediation in Sunjay Kapur family feud

The Supreme Court on Thursday, May 14, 2026, reiterated its appeal to the warring parties to resolve the bitter inheritance dispute through mediation, while restraining a key company associated with the disputed family estate of late industrialist Sunjay Kapur from proceeding with the appointment of independent directors.

A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that octogenarian Rani Kapur, mother of the late industrialist, must have been “shaken” by the ongoing family feud and urged the parties to resolve the dispute amicably to avoid a “prolonged war”.

Bench said, “…There is an 80-year-old woman. Sometimes you have to compromise at some point… We all come empty-handed and leave empty-handed. In the end, we only carry our soul. Do not approach the mediator with a pessimistic attitude. There must be a will to solve the problem.”

The high court made these observations while hearing an interim application filed by Ms. Kapur alleging attempted “forcible seizure” of disputed family assets. He alleged that his daughter-in-law was trying to gain control over key companies and assets linked to the estate, despite the Supreme Court’s May 7 order appointing former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud as a mediator to facilitate reaching a negotiated settlement.

The plea objected to the proposed board meeting of Raghuvanshi Investment Private Limited (RIPL), which holds majority stake in the family businesses, to be held on May 18; Here it was planned to appoint two independent directors and evaluate changes in authorized banking signatories.

Senior advocate Navin Pahwa, appearing for Ms Kapur, argued that the proposed appointments were aimed at wresting control from his client and pointed out that RIPL had a significant stake in the parent company. He urged the court to maintain the status quo while mediation proceedings continue.

“My shares were placed in trust behind my back. I had the majority shares of all companies. My daughter-in-law also transferred my shares to the foundation,” he said.

However, senior advocate Kapil Sibal, speaking on behalf of RIPIL, defended the proposed orders and maintained that the company, being a non-banking finance company, had complied with the directions issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) following an inspection conducted in February.

“RIPL is an investment company. It is a manager and no one can change that,” Mr. Sibal said.

‘There is no disruption in mediation’

However, the Board refused to allow the appointment of independent directors and observed that compliance with the RBI directives could await the outcome of the mediation process.

“Meanwhile, the directives of the RBI and regulatory compliances will not be suppressed by the RBI or any other statutory authority,” the Bench said.

In its decision, the court took into account Ms. Rani Kapur’s concerns that the proposed board meeting and appointments could aggravate the family dispute and adversely affect the ongoing mediation process.

In its instruction, the delegation said, “We do not propose to say anything more at this point. We have already requested the knowledgeable mediator to begin mediation. For now, we request the parties not to do anything that will directly affect the mediation process.”

The justices also warned that if the rival parties do not want to mediate meaningfully, they will continue to discuss the matter on the merits and make a decision.

The delegation said, “We told you that if you are not interested in mediation, we will not proceed in this direction. We will hear and decide on this case.”

Accordingly, the Board said it would re-examine the issue after receiving a report from the mediator.

Sunjay Kapur, chairman of automotive parts maker Sona Comstar, died of a heart attack while playing polo in London last year. The Rani Kapur Family Foundation was created by a trust deed signed on 26 October 2017 and currently holds shares in Sona Comstar.

The proceedings before the high court arise out of a petition filed by octogenarian Ms. Rani Kapur, seeking protection of her family property. In her defense, Ms. Kapur questioned the creation and operation of the family trust and claimed that the structure had effectively stripped her of control over significant assets without her informed consent.

According to the petition, the dispute dates back to 2017, when Ms. Kapur suffered a stroke. He claimed that following his medical condition, his late son and others planned the transfer of significant family assets to the trust without his full knowledge or consent. The defense also alleges that he was asked to sign documents under the guise of routine administrative formalities.

It was published – 14 May 2026 15:34 IST