Probate & Letters of Administration in India

A major December 2025 change -- mandatory probate has been repealed nationwide

This platform flags this prominently because most existing legal content, including much of what is published online, still describes probate as mandatory in parts of India -- that description is now outdated. Under the old Section 213(1) and (2) of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, no right as executor or legatee could be established in any court without first obtaining probate or letters of administration, where the will was made by a Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, or Jain within territories that were, on 1 September 1870, subject to the Bengal Lieutenant-Governor, or within the original civil jurisdiction of the Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay High Courts, or wherever the will related to immovable property situated in those areas. Muslims and Indian Christians were always exempt from this requirement. This platform understands that the Repealing and Amending Act, 2025 received Presidential assent on 20 December 2025 and omitted Section 213 entirely, along with consequential references elsewhere in the Act -- this platform could not independently verify the Gazette notification's exact text or the precise effective-date mechanics for pending matters, and recommends confirming both directly with a lawyer before relying on this change for an active or pending case.

Letters of Administration when there is no will, and a 2025 Supreme Court ruling on probate versus escheat

Where a person dies without a will, or a will exists but no executor is named or willing to act, the court instead grants Letters of Administration, appointing an administrator to collect and distribute the estate under the court's supervision. This platform understands the Supreme Court addressed a related question in a ruling around September 2025 (the Khetri Trust matter, State of Rajasthan v. Ajit Singh), holding that a state government has no standing to challenge a probate merely by invoking escheat proceedings -- escheat under Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act applies only where there is a total failure of heirs on intestate succession, and does not apply once a valid will with a named legatee exists; only heirs, not the state, can challenge a probate. This platform recommends confirming the precise citation before relying on it in a filing.

Why probate remains advisable though optional, court fees, and NRI participation via Power of Attorney

Despite the repeal of the mandatory requirement, practitioner guidance is consistent that seeking probate remains advisable, though now optional, particularly for contested or suspicious wills and complex multi-heir estates, and because banks, registrars, and land authorities may still expect it as an internal risk-management practice even though it is no longer a legal precondition -- this platform recommends confirming a specific institution's current requirement directly rather than assuming the legal change has been uniformly adopted in practice. Court fees for probate are governed by the Court Fees Act, 1870 as amended by individual states, and are generally ad valorem (a percentage of estate value); this platform could not verify current state-by-state percentage figures from a primary source and recommends treating any specific percentage as approximate, confirming the applicable rate for the relevant state directly. An NRI executor or beneficiary can generally appoint an India-based representative via a Power of Attorney, ideally notarized and attested at the Indian consulate or embassy, to file and pursue a probate or Letters of Administration petition and attend hearings, though courts may still require certain affidavits or personal verification directly from the NRI in some cases.

Common mistakes people make with probate:

• Assuming probate is still mandatory in Kolkata, Chennai, or Mumbai's original jurisdiction -- this platform understands that requirement was repealed nationwide in December 2025.
• Assuming a bank or registrar will automatically stop asking for probate just because it is no longer a legal requirement -- institutional practice may lag behind the legal change.
• Not confirming the current effective-date mechanics for a pending probate matter directly with a lawyer, given how recent and unsettled the practical application of this change may still be.