Revocation by Marriage explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
A will may be revoked or altered at any time while the maker is competent, and the right is absolute. An unprivileged will is revoked in two ways — revocation by marriage under section 69, operating by law, and revocation by act of parties under section 70.
The absolute right in section 62, before revocation by marriage arises
Revocation means the official cancellation of a decision. Under section 62, a will is liable to be revoked or altered by the maker of it at any time when he is competent to dispose of his property by will.
The handbook states the strength of the right plainly: the testator's right to revoke during his lifetime is absolute. It can neither be waived nor restricted. The only instance in which a will cannot be revoked is the case of mutual or joint wills, which become irrevocable after the death of one of the makers.
Revocation by marriage — the operation of law under section 69
According to section 69, every will shall be revoked by the marriage of the maker. The maker can be a man or a woman. Revocation by marriage is revocation by operation of law — nothing has to be done, and nothing has to be signed.
The principle on which revocation by marriage rests is that marriage creates such a change in the testator's condition, with new obligations and duties, that it raises an inference that the testator would not adhere to the will made before the marriage. And the rule reaches both classes of will: every will, whether unprivileged or privileged, is revoked by the marriage of the maker.
The exception that matters most in Indian practice is the third one the handbook lists: as section 69 does not apply to Hindus, a will made by a Hindu is not revoked by his marriage.
That has consequences in both directions. For a Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh or Jain client, an old pre-marriage will stays alive after the wedding, quietly, and will govern the estate unless it is deliberately replaced. A will made before a first marriage that leaves everything to a parent or sibling is a live instrument decades later.
For a client governed by the Indian Succession Act generally — a Christian or Parsi testator, or one married under the Special Marriage Act — the opposite risk applies: the carefully drafted will is destroyed by the marriage itself, with no document and no notice, and the estate falls into intestacy unless a fresh will is made.
Either way the practical rule is the same: marriage is a diary event for reviewing the will, whichever personal law applies.
The handbook lists three exceptions to revocation by marriage:
- (a) property bequeathed under a power which the maker was empowered to exercise — the printed text reads "Property bequeathed by the executor who is empowered to do so", which is garbled and is reproduced here as it appears;
- (b) where two persons make mutual wills, the marriage of one of them does not revoke the will of the other; and
- (c) Hindus, to whom section 69 does not apply.
Revocation by act of parties, as distinct from revocation by marriage
Section 70 governs the second mode. Reading it with the handbook's own illustrations, an unprivileged will or codicil, or any part of it, is revoked only in one of four ways:
| Mode | What is required |
|---|---|
| (i) | Another will or codicil |
| (ii) | Some writing declaring an intention to revoke, executed in the manner in which an unprivileged will is required to be executed |
| (iii) | Burning, tearing or otherwise destroying the will by the testator |
| (iv) | The same by some person in his presence and by his direction |
The handbook prints: "no unprivileged will or codicil, nor any part thereof, can be revoked by i. preparing another will or codicil, or ii. by some writing declaring an intention to revoke …".
As written, that says these methods do not revoke a will — which is the opposite of the section, and is flatly contradicted by the handbook's own two illustrations printed immediately below, both of which conclude "This is a revocation".
The section provides that a will may be revoked otherwise than by these means not at all — that is, these are the exclusive routes. The table above states the modes as the illustrations require. Read section 70 from the bare Act rather than from this paragraph.
The two illustrations are instructive on their own terms. First: a person makes an unprivileged will, and afterwards makes another unprivileged will which purports to revoke the first. This is a revocation — and, critically, even if the second has not mentioned the revocation of the earlier will, the legal effect is that the earlier will stands automatically revoked.
Second: a person makes an unprivileged will, and afterwards, being entitled to make a privileged will, makes a privileged will that purports to revoke the unprivileged one. This is a revocation.
The writing that declares an intention to revoke
Mode (ii) is the one most often got wrong. A writing that revokes a will without replacing it must itself be executed in the manner in which an unprivileged will is required to be executed — that is, signed by the testator and attested by two witnesses.
A letter to a lawyer, an email to a family member or a note in a diary saying "my will is cancelled" satisfies none of that, and does not revoke anything. Where a client wants to revoke without making a new will, the instrument to prepare is a deed of revocation executed and attested exactly as a will.
Destruction, and the duplicate trap
Mode (iii) requires burning, tearing or otherwise destroying — an act, not an instruction. Mode (iv) permits it to be done by another person, but only in the testator's presence and by his direction. Destruction by an executor after death, or by a relative on the testator's telephoned instruction, revokes nothing.
And where a will has been executed in duplicate — one copy retained by the testator, the other deposited with someone else — the destruction by the testator of the copy in his own possession revokes the will, including the deposited copy.
Codicils — altering rather than revoking
Where the testator wants to change part of a will rather than replace it, the instrument is a codicil. Under section 2(b), a codicil means an instrument made in relation to a will, explaining, altering or adding to its dispositions, and shall be deemed to form part of the will.
A codicil modifies an earlier will, in part or in whole. It can add, remove or change provisions, but it does not replace the will itself. It must be executed with the same formalities as the will — signed by the will-maker with witnesses present — and is then attached to the copy of the original will.
The handbook lists what a codicil is typically used to do: change the executor; update beneficiaries; update guardianship wishes; protect beneficiaries from tax consequences; and revise end-of-life wishes.
Because a codicil is deemed to form part of the will and must be attached to the original, a will with three codicils is a four-document instrument that has to be read together, proved together, and kept together.
Each codicil also needs its own signature and two attesting witnesses, so the formality saved is nil. The only real economy is emotional — the testator does not have to revisit the whole document.
Since section 70 makes a later will revoke an earlier one automatically, even without saying so, a fresh will costs no more to execute and removes the risk that a codicil is separated from the will it amends. Reserve codicils for a genuinely narrow change made shortly after the will.
Practical checklist
- Diary a will review on marriage, whichever personal law applies — revocation by marriage is silent when it operates.
- For a non-Hindu client, treat revocation by marriage as automatic and make a fresh will.
- For a Hindu client, check whether an old pre-marriage will is still alive.
- Revoke earlier wills expressly, even though section 70 does it automatically.
- Execute a standalone deed of revocation with the same formalities as a will.
- Ensure any destruction is by the testator, or in his presence and by his direction.
- Track every duplicate, since destroying the testator's copy revokes the will.
- Prefer a fresh will to a second or third codicil.
Common mistakes
- Assuming revocation by marriage applies to a Hindu testator.
- Assuming revocation by marriage does not apply to a Christian or Parsi testator.
- Revoking by letter or email rather than by an attested writing.
- Having a relative destroy the will on the testator's telephoned instruction.
- Executing a codicil without the will's own formalities.
- Leaving a codicil unattached to the original will.