Right as executor or legatee when established
Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 deals with right as executor or legatee when established. No right as executor or legatee can be established in any Court of Justice, unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in [India] has granted probate of the will under which the right is claimed, or has granted letters of administration with the will or with a copy of an authenticated copy of the will The Act came into force on 30 Sep 1925.
(1) No right as executor or legatee can be established in any Court of Justice, unless a Court of competent jurisdiction in 1[India] has granted probate of the will under which the right is claimed, or has granted letters of administration with the will or with a copy of an authenticated copy of the will annexed.
2[(2) This section shall not apply in the case of wills made by Muhammadans 3[or Indian Christians], and shall only apply--
(i) in the case of wills made by any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina where such wills are of the classes specified in clauses (a) and (b) of section 57; and
(ii) in the case of wills made by any Parsi dying, after the commencement of the Indian Succession (Amendment) Act, 1962 (16 of 1962), where such wills are made within the local limits of the 4[ordinary-original civil jurisdiction of the High Courts at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay, and where such wills are made outside those limits, in so far as they relate to immovable property situate within those limits.]
STATE AMENDMENTS
Karela.--
Amendment of section 213.--In sub-section (2) of section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Central Act 39 of 1925), after the word 'Muhammadans', the words 'or Indian Christians' shall be inserted.
[vide Kerala Act 1 of 1997, sec. 2].
Section 213, The Indian Succession Act, 1925 (Act 39 of 1925).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Kanta Yadav v. Om Prakash Yadav
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-9.pdf 2019-07-24. CA 5823/2019 (SLP C 19096/2017). Hemant Gupta/Nageswara Rao. Tool said VERIFY (not DATE VERIFIED / not WRONG DOCUMENT); body is the named 24 Jul 2019 reportable. s.213 read with s.57: probate is not required to establish a Hindu will executed outside the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Courts of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay (here Delhi/Punjab). Follows Clarence Pais. Clarence Pais labelled PDF remains a pronouncement ROP.
On this section: s.213 probate is not required to establish a Hindu will executed outside the Presidency-town original-side limits in s.57 (Kanta Yadav, following Clarence Pais).
-
Krishna Kumar Birla vs Rajendra Singh Lodha
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
To sustain a caveat, a caveatable interest must be shown. The test required to be applied is: does the claim of grant of probate prejudice the caveator's right because it defeats some other line of succession in terms whereof the caveator asserts his right. A fundamental characteristic of probate proceedings is that whatever would be the interest of the testator, the same must be accepted and the rules laid down must be followed. Consequently, any person questioning the existence of title in respect of the estate or the capacity of the testator to dispose of the property by will on grounds outside the law of succession would be a stranger to the probate proceeding, inasmuch as none of such rights can effectively be adjudicated therein. A caveatable interest is an interest in the estate of the deceased to which the caveator would otherwise be entitled, subject to having a special interest therein. After coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, the concept of reversioner, agnate, and cognate interest in succession has been fundamentally altered. Only heirs specified in Classes I and II under the Act can claim succession. Distant relatives, family members, and executors of an earlier unprobated will do not have caveatable interest in the estate unless they are named as beneficiaries or have direct stake in the distribution. The existence of mutual wills or filing of suit to enforce mutual wills does not create caveatable interest in the original probate proceedings; such enforcement is remedy in equity through specific performance, not in probate court. A later will, even if in breach of mutual will agreement, is valid and probatable as probate court is concerned only with last will of testator.
On this section: No right as executor or legatee can be established unless court has granted probate or letters of administration. Caveators cannot claim rights under unprobated will unless probate is granted.
-
Suresh Manilal Mehta vs Varsha Bhadresh Joshi
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The right to apply for probate under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is a continuing right that can be exercised at any time after the testator's death so long as the right to do so survives. The limitation period begins when the right to apply accrues, which is when it becomes necessary to apply, not from the date of death. Delay beyond three years from the date of death arouses suspicion, but once execution and attestation of the Will are proved, the suspicion of delay no longer operates and cannot be equated with an absolute bar of limitation. A testator need not be in perfect physical or mental health to execute a valid Will; so long as the testator has sufficient capacity to discern and discreetly judge the matters that enter into a rational, fair, and just testament, testamentary capacity is established. Chronic ailments such as diabetes, hypertension, and heart disease do not per se constitute lack of testamentary capacity. Allegations of forgery must be supported by credible evidence, including expert handwriting analysis; bare assertions without foundation are insufficient. In testamentary jurisdiction, the court exercises circumspection, not suspicion, and the test is not of absolute exactitude or great precision.
On this section: Provides that no right as executor or legatee can be established unless probate has been granted by a competent court
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 213
What have the courts held on Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act?
Kanta Yadav v. Om Prakash Yadav (24 Jul 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: s.213 probate is not required to establish a Hindu will executed outside the Presidency-town original-side limits in s.57 (Kanta Yadav, following Clarence Pais). Another 2 judgments on this section are set out below, 2 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Succession Act 213, section 213 Succession Act, section 213 of the Indian Succession Act. People searching for it also type indian succession act section 213 2 and indian succession act 1925 section 213. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 3 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Kanta Yadav v. Om Prakash Yadav (24 Jul 2019).
What should I read with Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 57 (Application of certain provisions of Part to a class of wills made by Hindus, etc), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it.
When did Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act come into force?
Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, cited as Succession Act 213, came into force on 30 Sep 1925, having been enacted on 30 Sep 1925. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 120. Date of vesting when legacy contingent upon specified uncertain event712 words
- 111. Survivorship in case of bequest to described class652 words
- 142. Specific legacy defined646 words
- 101. Rules of construction where will purports to make two bequests to same person620 words
- 113. Bequest to person not in existence at testator’s death subject to prior bequest486 words
- 114. Rule against perpetuity469 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.