Priya Sachdeva Kapur, widow of the late industrialist Sunjay Kapur, has filed a civil defamation suit in the Delhi High Court seeking damages of ₹20 crore against Mandhira Kapur Smith and podcast host Pooja Chaudhri. According to the plaint, statements made about her in podcasts, interviews, social media posts, and republished online content have allegedly caused serious harm to her reputation while inflicting emotional distress and social humiliation.
The suit, filed under the court’s ordinary original civil jurisdiction, seeks not only financial compensation but also permanent injunctions restraining the defendants from publishing or circulating further allegedly defamatory material. Priya Kapur has further demanded that all existing content be removed from digital, social, and media platforms, along with a public, unconditional apology issued by the defendants.
The complaint highlights that the alleged defamatory statements began circulating shortly after the death of Sunjay Kapur in June 2025. According to Priya Kapur, these statements have questioned her integrity, professional conduct, and role in business matters, affecting her standing in society and causing distress to both her and her children. A significant focus of the suit is content aired on the podcast “InControversial with Pooja Chaudhri,” which was later republished widely on platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and X. The plaintiff claims that the repeated availability and circulation of these statements have amplified their impact and prolonged the harm caused.
In addition to the civil proceedings, Priya Kapur has also lodged a criminal defamation complaint against Mandhira Kapur Smith and another individual, alleging that a coordinated campaign was carried out to damage her reputation through statements across podcasts, media interviews, social media platforms, and online republished content. The overlapping civil and criminal cases reflect the intensity of the dispute within the Kapur family, particularly following the death of Sunjay Kapur, which brought longstanding family and business tensions into sharper public focus.
The plaint also places the current defamation claims in the context of previous family disagreements and legal disputes, detailing a pattern of conflict and highlighting earlier communications and proceedings that, according to Priya Kapur, demonstrate sustained hostility. These past disputes form an important backdrop, showing that the allegations are not isolated incidents but part of broader family and business complexities.
Meanwhile, a related family matter concerning the RK Family Trust recently came before the Delhi High Court. Rani Kapur had filed a suit seeking the dissolution of the trust while also requesting that the estate’s assets be protected. During the hearing, the court emphasized the importance of preserving family relationships and treating accumulated family assets as a blessing rather than a source of conflict. Allegations were raised questioning whether Priya Kapur had acted hastily or fraudulently in relation to certain estate matters, which were presented as part of her plea. Observing the sensitive nature of the dispute, the High Court suggested that mediation could offer a more constructive resolution, encouraging all parties to attempt reconciliation and avoid prolonged litigation.
Priya Sachdeva Kapur’s legal action brings both family dynamics and personal reputation into the public eye. With the civil suit seeking ₹20 crore in damages alongside injunctions and public apologies, and the criminal complaint running concurrently, legal observers expect a complex and potentially extended court battle. The case highlights how personal loss, public scrutiny, and family tensions intersect, raising questions about accountability, reputation management, and the impact of media circulation on individual lives. As proceedings move forward, all eyes remain on the Delhi High Court, which will determine both the merits of the defamation claims and the potential for resolution within a prominent family entangled in legal and social controversy.