Supreme Court Rules on Probate Requirement for Wills: Clarifies Indian Succession Act

The case of Kanta Yadav v. Om Prakash Yadav & Ors. pertains to a dispute over the applicability of Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, concerning the necessity of obtaining probate for a Will before establishing inheritance rights in a court of law. The Supreme Court ruled that probate was not required for Wills executed outside the territories of Bengal, Madras, and Bombay unless the property in question was located within these territories. This judgment provides a significant interpretation of the Indian Succession Act and offers clarity on inheritance claims.

Background of the Case

The dispute arose over a Will executed by Zorawar Singh, who owned property in New Delhi. He executed a Will on June 16, 1985, along with a codicil on October 21, 1995, bequeathing his self-acquired property. Following his death on January 4, 1986, two separate suits were filed:

• The respondents (Om Prakash Yadav & Ors.) filed a suit seeking a declaration and permanent injunction regarding the Will.
• The appellant (Kanta Yadav) filed a separate suit claiming inheritance through natural succession.

The single judge of the Delhi High Court dismissed the respondents’ suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, citing that the suit was barred under Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act. However, the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court reversed this decision, holding that the probate requirement was not applicable in Delhi. The appellant then challenged this ruling before the Supreme Court.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s (Kanta Yadav’s) Argument

• The suit filed by the respondents was not maintainable as they had not obtained probate or letters of administration for the Will.
• Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act clearly prohibits establishing rights based on a Will in a court of law unless probate has been obtained.
• The High Court erred in ruling that probate was not necessary in Delhi, as the legal provisions applied uniformly across India.

Respondent’s (Om Prakash Yadav & Ors.) Argument

• Section 213(2) of the Indian Succession Act limits the requirement of probate only to Wills falling under clauses (a) and (b) of Section 57.
• Since the Will was executed in Delhi, probate was not mandatory under the law.
• Multiple High Court decisions, including those of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and the Delhi High Court, had clarified that probate was required only in Bengal, Madras, and Bombay.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

Understanding Section 213 and Section 57 of the Indian Succession Act

The Supreme Court analyzed Sections 213 and 57 of the Indian Succession Act to determine whether probate was necessary for establishing rights under a Will:

“No right as an executor or legatee can be established in any court unless a competent court has granted probate of the Will under which the right is claimed.”

However, Section 213(2) limits this requirement to specific cases:

• Clause (a): Wills executed by Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, or Jains within Bengal, Madras, or Bombay.
• Clause (b): Wills executed outside these territories but concerning immovable properties within these territories.

Since the Will in question was executed in Delhi and related to property in Delhi, the Court concluded that the requirement for probate did not apply.

Previous Judicial Precedents

The Court referred to multiple judicial precedents that had examined the scope of probate requirements:

• Ram Chand v. Sardara Singh (1962): Held that probate was not required for Wills executed outside Bengal, Madras, or Bombay.
• Behari Lal Ram Charan v. Karam Chand Sahni (1968): Clarified that Wills executed in Punjab or Haryana did not require probate.
• Winifred Nora Theophilus v. Lila Deane (2002): Held that no probate was needed for a Will executed in Delhi concerning immovable property in Delhi.

The Court reaffirmed these rulings, stating:

“Where both the person and property of any Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, or Jain are outside the territories mentioned in Section 57, the requirement of probate does not apply.”

Jurisdictional Limitations

The Supreme Court emphasized that probate was a procedural requirement imposed only in select regions:

“The law governing Wills must be applied in accordance with territorial jurisdiction, ensuring that unnecessary procedural burdens are not imposed beyond the scope of the statute.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the Delhi High Court:

“The necessity of obtaining probate arises only for Wills executed within the territorial limits specified in Section 57. The suit is maintainable without probate.”

Thus, the appellant’s challenge was dismissed, allowing the respondents to establish their rights under the Will without the need for probate.

Significance of the Judgment

• Clarifies the Probate Requirement: The ruling confirms that probate is not required for Wills executed outside Bengal, Madras, or Bombay unless concerning property within these territories.
• Reduces Legal Complexity: Provides relief to beneficiaries by removing unnecessary probate requirements in regions like Delhi, Punjab, and Haryana.
• Affirms Judicial Precedents: Aligns with previous High Court rulings, reinforcing consistency in inheritance laws.
• Streamlines Succession Disputes: Ensures that legal heirs can claim their inheritance without being subjected to additional procedural burdens.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Kanta Yadav v. Om Prakash Yadav & Ors. is a landmark judgment that clarifies the interpretation of probate requirements under the Indian Succession Act. By reaffirming that probate is not required for Wills executed in regions like Delhi unless dealing with property in Bengal, Madras, or Bombay, the Court has simplified succession claims for individuals outside these territories. This judgment ensures a practical and region-specific approach to inheritance laws in India.

Petitioner Name: Kanta Yadav.
Respondent Name: Om Prakash Yadav & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Justice Hemant Gupta.
Place Of Incident: New Delhi.
Judgment Date: 24-07-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Kanta Yadav vs Om Prakash Yadav & O Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 24-07-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Succession and Wills
See all petitions in Property Disputes
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in Judgment by Hemant Gupta
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category