Sections 115-116 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.
Sections 113 and 114 can make a bequest void. Sections 115 and 116 say how far the damage spreads. Section 115 asks whether a whole class loses its gift when only some of its members fall foul of those rules. Section 116 asks what happens to a later gift that was meant to follow the void one.
As per the text of the Act consulted, if a bequest is made to a class and is inoperative for some of the class by reason of section 113 or section 114, it is void in regard to those persons only, and not in regard to the whole class (s.115). Where a bequest in favour of a person or of a whole class is void under section 113 or 114, any bequest in the same will intended to take effect after or upon failure of that prior bequest is also void (s.116).
Section 115: a class gift is not lost as a whole
Section 115 provides that if a bequest is made to a class of persons with regard to some of whom it is inoperative by reason of section 113 or section 114, "such bequest shall be void in regard to those persons only, and not in regard to the whole class". In the copy consulted, the words after "shall be" and the text of the illustrations carry square brackets, which mark inserted or substituted words; the copy does not say which Act did it.
The effect is a splitting rule. Section 113 (a bequest to an unborn person of less than the whole remaining interest) and section 114 (the rule against perpetuity) may bite on only part of a group. Section 115 keeps the gift alive for the members who are within the limits. See our articles on section 113 and section 114.
The Act's two illustrations to section 115
The sums and ages are the Act's own, not current facts.
- Illustration (i). A fund is bequeathed to A for life and after his death to all his children who attain the age of 25. A survives the testator and has some children living at the testator's death. Each child living at the testator's death must attain 25, if at all, within the limits allowed. But A may have children after the testator's death, some of whom may not attain 25 until more than 18 years have elapsed after A's death. The bequest is therefore inoperative as to any child born after the testator's death and in regard to those who do not attain 25 within 18 years after A's death, but operative in regard to the other children of A.
- Illustration (ii). The same fund goes to A for life and then to B, C, D and all other children of A who attain 25, where B, C and D are children of A living at the testator's death. The mention of B, C and D does not prevent the bequest from being regarded as a bequest to a class, but it is not wholly void. It is operative as regards any of B, C or D who attains 25 within 18 years after A's death.
A reader working on a will like this should consider a legal consultation to separate the living children from those yet to be born, because the answer differs for each.
The State amendment box printed in the copy
Inside section 115 the copy prints a box headed "State amendments". It reads, as printed, that in its application to the States of Gujarat and Maharashtra, in section 115 (in relation to trusts, wills and other testamentary dispositions), the words "section 113 or" are to be omitted, citing Bombay Act 54 of 1947, Section 2 and Sch. This box is not part of the central text explained here, and the closing bracket of the box is missing in the copy. Anyone whose will or trust falls in those States should check the State position directly.
Section 116: a later bequest falls with the earlier one
Section 116 is printed in the copy in square brackets. It says that where, by reason of any of the rules in sections 113 and 114, any bequest in favour of a person or of a class of persons is void in regard to such person or the whole of such class, any bequest contained in the same will and intended to take effect after or upon failure of that prior bequest is also void.
Two features stand out:
- The prior bequest must be void in regard to such person or the whole of such class. If the prior bequest is void only for some of the class, this section is not triggered by the words; section 115 handles that case.
- The later bequest must be in the same will and intended to take effect after or upon failure of the prior one.
The two illustrations to section 116
- A fund is bequeathed to A for life, then to such of his sons as shall first attain 25, for his life, and after that son's death to B. A and B survive the testator. The bequest to B is intended to take effect after the bequest to the son, which is void under section 114. The bequest to B is void.
- A fund is bequeathed to A for life, then to such of his sons as shall first attain 25, and if no son attains that age, to B. A and B survive the testator. The bequest to B is intended to take effect upon failure of the bequest to the sons, which is void under section 114. The bequest to B is void.
A printing note: in the copy, the text of illustration (ii) of section 116 begins on a line that opens with a number and a full stop ("114. The bequest"); that is the end of a sentence, not a section heading.
The two sections side by side
| Point | Section 115 | Section 116 |
|---|---|---|
| Triggered by | Bequest to a class, inoperative for some by section 113 or 114 | Bequest void for a person or the whole class by section 113 or 114 |
| Effect | Void for those persons only, valid for the rest | A later bequest in the same will, meant to follow, is also void |
| Illustrations | Two, both on children attaining 25 | Two, both on a gift over to B |
Examples with invented names
Partly void class gift. Usha's will leaves a fund to her son Rohit for life and then to "all Rohit's children who reach 25". Rohit has two children when Usha dies, and may have more. Following illustration (i) to section 115, the gift is operative for the two living children if they reach 25 within the limits, and inoperative for any child born later who cannot qualify in time.
Gift over fails. In another will, a fund is left to Sanjay for life, then to such of his sons as first reach 25, and if none does, to Pritha. If the bequest to the sons is void under section 114, then as in illustration (ii) to section 116 the bequest to Pritha is void too.
Where these sections apply
Schedule III lists sections 115 and 116 among the sections of Part VI that section 57 applies to the wills and codicils of Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jainas described there, and restriction 5 names both sections among those in which "son", "sons", "child" and "children" are deemed to include an adopted child. Section 58 as printed says Part VI does not apply to the testamentary succession to the property of any Muhammadan. See our article on wills of Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jainas.
The Transfer of Property Act, 1882 deals with similar questions for transfers between living persons; see our article on sections 15 to 18 of that Act and check the current law for the corresponding provision. The print consulted shows amendments only up to the Indian Succession (Amendment) Act, 2002 (26 of 2002); check for later amendments.
Need help with a class gift or a gift over?
When a will gives property to "all my children who reach" a certain age, or adds a gift over "if none does", each clause needs to be tested against these sections. You can start with a legal consultation to check which members of the class are inside the limits.
Key takeaways
- A class bequest that fails under section 113 or 114 for some members is void for those members only (s.115).
- Members within the limits keep their gift.
- A later bequest in the same will, intended to follow a bequest void for a person or a whole class, is also void (s.116).
- The copy consulted prints one State amendment box inside section 115 for Gujarat and Maharashtra; it is not central law.
- Check later amendments to the central text.
Read next
- Section 113: bequest to an unborn person subject to a prior bequest
- Section 114: rule against perpetuity in wills
- Section 117: direction for accumulation of income in a will
- Sections 15 to 18 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Disclaimer: Based on an unofficial print of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 showing amendments up to the Indian Succession (Amendment) Act, 2002 (26 of 2002), as consulted on 2 October 2026. It explains the words of the statute only; later amendments, State amendments and rules, court fees and the way courts apply these sections should be checked. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.