Till January 1986, Christians in the State of Kerala were governed by two different Acts –

those domiciled in Cochin were subject to the application of the Cochin Christian Succession
Act, 1921, while the Travancore Christians were governed by the Travancore Christian
Succession Act, 1916. These two Acts have now been repealed and the Christians following
these laws earlier are now governed by the general scheme of inheritance under the Indian
Succession Act, 1925. However, Protestant and Tamil Christians, for example, living in
certain taluks, are still governed by their respective customary laws. Christians in the State of
Goa and the Union Territories of Daman and Diu are governed by the Portuguese Civil Code,
1867, while those in Pondicherry could be governed by the French Civil Code, 1804 (such
Christians are known as “Renocants”), customary Hindu law, or the Indian Succession Act.

Succession, in brief, deals with how the property of a deceased person devolves on his heirs.
This property may be ancestral or self-acquired, and may devolve in two ways:

1. By Testamentary Succession, i.e., when the deceased has left a will bequeathing his
property to specific heirs
2. By Intestate Succession, i.e., when the deceased has not left a will, whereby the law
governing the deceased (according to his religion) steps in, and determines how his
estate will devolve.

S. 2(d) of the Act defines an “Indian Christian” hereby: “Indian Christian” means 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.
In the case of Kamawati v. Digbijoy thereafter it was held by the Privy Council that the old
law ceases to be applicable with regard to inheritance i.e., succession. Thereafter in a recent
2001 judgement, the Allahabad High Court reiterated that Hindu converts to Christianity will
be bound solely by the succession laws governing Christians, inclusive of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925, and it will not be possible for them to elect to be governed by the old
law in this or related matters.
Intestate Succession Among Indian Christians
S. 30 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 defines intestate succession……………. insofar as
he is an Indian Christian, devolve as per the rules contained in Chapter II of the Act. It would
be worthwhile to note at this point that intestacy is either total or partial. There is a total
intestacy where the deceased does not effectively dispose of any beneficial interest in any of
his property by will. There is a partial intestacy where the deceased effectively disposes of
some, but not all, of the beneficial interest in his property by will.

Domicile
The Domicile of the deceased plays an integral role in determining the method of devolution
of his property.
S.5 of the Act categorically states that succession to the movable property of the deceased
will be governed by the lex loci as per where he had his domicile at the time of his death;
whereas succession to his immovable property will be governed by the law of India (lex loci
rei sital), no matter where he was domiciled at the time of his death. Also, S. 6 further
qualifies this provision by stating that a person can have only one domicile for the purpose of
succession to his movable property. It must be noted that domicile and nationality differ from
each other – domicile deals with immediate residence, whereas nationality implies the
original allegiance borne by the person. S. 15 lays down that upon and during subsistence of
marriage, the wife acquires the domicile of her husband automatically.

Kindred Or Consanguinity
S. 24 of the Act makes an initial reference to the concept of kindred and consanguinity,
defining it as “the connection or relation of persons descended from the same stock or
common ancestor.” S. 25 qualifies ‘lineal consanguinity’ with regard to descent in a direct
line. Under this head fall those relations who are descendants from one another or both from
the same common ancestor. Now, succession can be either ‘per capita’ (one share to each
heir, when they are all of the same degree of relationship) or ‘per stirpes’ (division according
to branches when degrees of relationship are discrete). For Christians, if one were to claim
through a relative who was of the same degree as the nearest kindred to the deceased, one
would be deemed to stand in the shoes of such relative and claim ‘per stirpes.’

S. 26 qualifies ‘collateral consanguinity’ as occurring when persons are descended from the
same stock or common ancestor, but not in a direct line (for example, two brothers). It is
interesting to note that the law for Christians does not make any distinction between relations
through the father or the mother. If the relations from the paternal and maternal sides are
equally related to the intestate, they are all entitled to succeed and will take equal share
among themselves. However, in hindu law agnates are given preference over cognates. Also,
no distinction is made between full-blood/half-blood/uterine relations; and a posthumous
child is treated as a child who was present when the intestate died, so long as the child has
been born alive and was in the womb when the intestate died. Whereas in Hindu law s15
explicitly says that full blood is preferred to half blood.

Christian law does not recognise children born out of wedlock; it only deals with legitimate
marriages. Whereas in hindu law an illegitimate child only has the right to his father’s self-
acquired property and not his ancestral property. Polygamous marriages are not recognised
both in Hindu and Christian law.

S 32 of the act recognises three types of heirs for Christians: the spouse, the lineal
descendants, and the kindred.
Rights Of The Widow And Widower
S. 33, S. 33-A, S. 34 of the Act govern succession to the widow. Together they lay down that
if the deceased has left behind both a widow and lineal descendants, she will get one-third
share in his estate while the remaining two-thirds will go to the latter. If no lineal descendants
have been left but other kindred are alive, one-half of the estate passes to the widow and the
rest to the kindred. And if no kindred are left either, the whole of the estate shall belong to his
widow.

S. 35 lays down the rights of the widower of the deceased. It says quite simply that he shall
have the same rights in respect of her property as she would in the event that he predeceased
her (intestate).
However, in Hindu law a wife is entitled to an equivalent portion of her spouse’s properties
like other living and entitled beneficiaries. In the event that there are no other sharers, the
wife has the full option to acquire the whole property of her deceased spouse. As per Section
10 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the appropriation of property happens among all heirs,
including the widow of the deceased person.
Rights Of Children and Other Lineal Descendants
If the widow is not alive the lineal descendants take the whole of the share. The devolution of
property is per capita if they stand in the same degree of relationship of the deceased- S36-40.
Tenants in common is followed.
Whereas under Hindu law Mitakshara school follows joint tenancy and Dayabhaga follows
tenants in common (meets and bounds).
The religion of the heirs will not act as estoppel with regard to succession. Even the Hindu
father of a son who had converted to Christianity was held entitled to inherit from him after
his death.
On the other hand in Hindu law, a son who is ceases to be a Hindu, such a son’s son will not
be entitled to inherit the grandfather’s property till he converts to Hindu.
As per S. 48, where the intestate has left neither lineal descendant, nor parent, nor sibling, his
property shall be divided equally among those of his relatives who are in the nearest degree
of kin to him. If there are no heirs whatsoever to the intestate, the doctrine of escheat can be
invoked by the Government, whereupon the estate of the deceased will revert to the State.
(same for Hindu)
According to S. 59, every person of sound mind, not being a minor, may dispose of his
property by will. The explanations to this Section further expand the ambit of testamentary
disposition of estate by categorically stating that married women as also deaf/dumb/blind
persons who are not thereby incapacitated to make a will are all entitled to disposing their
property by will. Soundness of mind and freedom from intoxication or any illness that render
a person incapable of knowing what he is doing are also laid down as prerequisites to the
process.