Christian intestate succession in India: who inherits what share

Mary D'Souza lost her husband in Mangaluru last year. He left three children, a flat, a fixed deposit and no will at all. Under section 33 of the Indian Succession Act 1925, Mary takes one-third of his estate, and the remaining two-thirds is divided equally among the three children.

These rules sit in Part V, Chapter II of the Indian Succession Act 1925 and govern Christians, not Parsis, who have their own chapter.

Section 33 says it plainly: where a lineal descendant survives, “one-third of his property shall belong to his widow, and the remaining two-thirds shall go to his lineal descendants”.

Both examples assume debts are settled: sections 320, 321 and 325 pay funeral and death-bed expenses first, then the cost of letters of administration, then the debts. Only the balance is divided.

1. Section 33(a) gives Mary one-third off the top: Rs 30,00,000.
2. Section 36 divides the rest among the lineal descendants “after deducting the widow's share”.
3. Section 37 applies because only children survive. Rs 60,00,000 split three ways is Rs 20,00,000 each.

The sequence matters: the widow's third comes off the whole estate first, and the children split only what remains. Section 37 says the property “shall be equally divided among all his surviving children”, so daughters and sons take the same amount.

Had one of the three children died before the father leaving two children of her own, section 40 would apply. The three branch shares of Rs 20,00,000 would stand, and that branch's share would split between the two grandchildren at Rs 10,00,000 each.

1. Section 33(b) gives the widow one-half: Rs 45,00,000.
2. Section 41 sends the other half to the kindred rules in ss.42 to 48.
3. Section 42 is short and absolute: “If the intestate's father is living, he shall succeed to the property.” The father takes the entire Rs 45,00,000.
4. The mother and both brothers take nothing.

A living father blocks the mother and every sibling from the kindred half. The mother enters only once the father is dead.

Half-blood siblings are not cut down. The illustration to section 43 has a mother, two full brothers and a half-blood sister taking a quarter each.

Section 29 sets the boundary. Chapter II does not apply “to the property of any Hindu, Muhammadan, Buddhist, Sikh or Jaina”. Section 29(2) makes it the law of India “in all cases of intestacy”, saving only sub-section (1) “or by any other law for the time being in force”. A local law can still displace these rules in some territories, so check what applies where the deceased lived.

Section 31 walls off the Parsis. “Nothing in this Chapter shall apply to Parsis.” Parsi intestates fall under Chapter III, sections 50 to 56, where the arithmetic differs completely: section 51 gives a Parsi widow or widower and each child equal shares, and each surviving parent half a child's share.

Section 33A does not apply to an Indian Christian. It gives a widow with no lineal descendants the first Rs 5,000 of the estate with 4 per cent interest, but sub-section (5) excludes “the property of any Indian Christian” and of any child or grandchild of a male person who was an Indian Christian at death. Section 2(d) defines an Indian Christian as “a native of India who is, or in good faith claims to be, of unmixed Asiatic descent and who professes any form of the Christian religion”. For those estates section 33(b) runs clean, with no Rs 5,000 preference.

Descendants take per capita first, per stirpes only when degrees differ. This is the most misreported rule here. Section 38 covers grandchildren surviving with no child, and its illustration is blunt: nine grandchildren left by three dead children take “one-ninth” each, whatever the size of each branch. Per stirpes arithmetic starts only at section 40, where descendants “do not all stand in the same degree of kindred”. Section 49 separately bars hotchpot, so money the father gave a child in his lifetime is not set off against that child's share.

For Kerala, Mrs. Mary Roy v. State of Kerala, 1986 AIR 1011, (1986) 2 SCC 209, settled the point: once the Part B States Laws Act 1951 came into force, the Travancore Christian Succession Act 1092 “stood repealed and Chapter II of Part V of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 became applicable”. The shares under the Hindu Class I heir rules in section 8 and under Muslim inheritance shares follow different logic, so transplant neither.

There is no will, so there is nothing to probate. The removal of section 213 by the Repealing and Amending Act 2025 concerns wills only and does not touch a no-will estate; see the article on the section 213 repeal. You need one of two instruments instead.

A succession certificate under Part X, for debts and securities: bank balances, fixed deposits, shares, debentures and government securities. Section 370 restricts these certificates in some cases but carries a proviso expressly preserving them for “any person claiming to be entitled to the effects of a deceased Indian Christian”.

Letters of administration under Part IX, when you need authority over the estate generally, including immovable property. Section 218 lists Hindus, Muhammadans, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jainas and exempted persons; Christians are not on that list, so section 219 governs instead. Section 219(a) says administration “shall be granted to the widow, unless the Court sees cause to exclude her”, and its illustration records that remarriage is not such a cause. With no widow, the proviso to section 219© makes the mother “solely entitled to administration” if she is in the class beneficially entitled. Section 219(e) gives a surviving husband the same right. The letters of administration guide covers that filing.

Which court. Section 264 gives the District Judge jurisdiction over probate and letters of administration in all cases within his district. For a succession certificate, section 371 points to the District Judge “within whose jurisdiction the deceased ordinarily resided at the time of his death”, or, failing a fixed residence, where the property is found.

What the petition needs. Section 372 requires it to be signed and verified the way a plaint is under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908, setting out the time of death, the ordinary residence, the family and near relatives with their addresses, the right claimed, the absence of any impediment under section 370, and the debts and securities covered. Carry the death certificate, residence proof, identity proof for every heir, and a schedule of assets. Court fee is ad valorem on the value of those debts and securities under the Court Fees Act 1870 as amended by your state, so ask the District Judge's filing counter for the current slab.

If a public authority holds records you need, such as a service book, GPF or pension nominee details, or a municipal mutation file, an RTI moves faster than a lawyer's notice. Use the AI RTI drafting tool, check deadlines in the RTI Act 2005 text, see The RTI Playbook for the escalation route, and browse the practical guides index.

• Giving the widow half when there are children. She takes one-third under s.33(a); half applies only under s.33(b), where no descendant survives.
• Splitting the estate among everyone at once. Sections 36 and 41 deduct the widow's share first.
• Assuming grandchildren always inherit their parent's branch. True under s.40 where degrees differ; under s.38 grandchildren alone take per capita.
• Letting the mother claim while the father is alive. Section 42 gives the father the whole kindred share.
• Applying the s.33A Rs 5,000 widow provision. Sub-section (5) excludes Indian Christian estates outright.
• Forgetting partial intestacy. Illustration (ii) to section 30 shows a will that only appoints an executor leaves the maker intestate as to distribution.

No. Section 33(a) gives her one-third whenever a lineal descendant survives. The half share in section 33(b) applies only where no lineal descendant survives and there are kindred alive. With neither, section 33© gives her everything.

Yes. Section 37 says the property “shall be equally divided among all his surviving children” and makes no distinction between sons and daughters. That equality carries through sections 38 to 40 for grandchildren and remoter descendants.

If he left a widow she takes one-half under section 33(b), and the other half goes entirely to his father under section 42. If he left no widow, section 34 sends the whole estate to the kindred and section 42 gives all of it to his father. Either way the mother and siblings take nothing while the father is alive.

No. Probate proves a will, and there is none here. You need a succession certificate under Part X for bank balances and securities, or letters of administration under Part IX for the estate more broadly. The 2025 removal of section 213 changed a rule about wills only.

The District Judge. Section 264 covers probate and letters of administration for every case in the district. Section 371 sends a succession certificate application to the District Judge where the deceased ordinarily resided at death, or where the property lies if there was no fixed residence.

No, and this is a frequent error. Section 31 says nothing in Chapter II applies to Parsis. They fall under Chapter III, sections 50 to 56, where section 51 gives the widow or widower and each child equal shares and each surviving parent half a child's share.

Chapter II states no such bar. The only exclusion is the Explanation to section 32, which cuts off a widow excluded from her share by a valid contract made before her marriage. The illustration to section 219 confirms remarriage is not even cause to keep her from administering the estate.

• Indian Succession Act 1925, India Code, for sections 2, 29 to 49, 219, 264, 320, 321, 325 and 370 to 372.
• Mrs. Mary Roy v. State of Kerala, Supreme Court, 24 February 1986.
• Press Information Bureau factsheet on the Repealing and Amending Act 2025.

• Why a will needs two witnesses under section 63
• Cross-border estate planning for Indian assets held by an NRI