Sections 385-387 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.
Three short sections close the main body of Part X. Section 385 says a certificate is invalid if there is a previous grant in force. Section 386 protects payments made in good faith to the holder of an invalid or superseded certificate. Section 387 says a decision under Part X does not stop the same question being tried in a suit, and the holder remains liable to account. This article explains them, as per the text of the Act consulted.
Save as the Act provides, a certificate is invalid if there has been a previous grant of a certificate, or of probate or letters of administration, in respect of the deceased's estate and that previous grant is in force (s.385). Where a certificate is superseded or invalid, all payments made or dealings had in ignorance of its supersession or invalidity to or with the holder are held good against claims under any other certificate (s.386). No decision under Part X on a question of right between parties bars the trial of the same question in a suit or other proceeding between the same parties, and the liability to account to the person lawfully entitled is not affected (s.387).
Section 385: effect of a previous grant
"Save as provided by this Act", a certificate granted under Part X in respect of any of the effects of a deceased person "shall be invalid if there has been a previous grant of such a certificate or of probate or letters of administration in respect of the estate of the deceased person and if such previous grant is in force".
Three conditions:
- a certificate is granted in respect of the effects of a deceased person;
- there has been a previous grant of a certificate, or of probate, or of letters of administration, in respect of the estate; and
- that previous grant is in force.
The words "save as provided by this Act" mean other sections can change the result. The text of s.385 does not say which. Compare s.370, which stops a certificate for a debt or security whose right must be established by probate or letters of administration under s.212 or s.213 (see our article on section 370).
An invented example: after Mr. Gill's death, probate of his will is granted to his son. Later his daughter obtains a succession certificate for a bank deposit of his. If the probate is still in force, s.385 makes the certificate invalid, "save as provided by this Act".
If you suspect that a certificate may be invalid because of an earlier grant, early advice on certificate and grant disputes can help you check the position.
Section 386: payments to the holder of an invalid certificate
Section 386 applies where a certificate has been superseded or is invalid by reason of:
- its revocation under section 383;
- the grant of a certificate to a person named in an appellate order under section 384;
- a certificate having been previously granted; or
- "any other cause".
In those cases "all payments made or dealings had, as regards debts and securities specified in the superseded or invalid certificate, to or with the holder of that certificate in ignorance of its supersession or invalidity, shall be held good against claims under any other certificate".
The key words are in ignorance. Section 381 protects payments and dealings made "in good faith" with a certificate holder (see our article on sections 380 to 382); s.386 protects those made in ignorance of the supersession or invalidity, as against claims under any other certificate.
| Event | Section | Protection |
|---|---|---|
| Certificate revoked (s.383) | 386 | Payments or dealings with the holder in ignorance of supersession or invalidity are held good against claims under any other certificate |
| New certificate granted under an appellate order (s.384) | 386 | Same |
| Certificate previously granted | 386 | Same |
| Any other cause | 386 | Same |
An invented example: a debtor, Mr. Bedi, pays Rs. 40,000 to Ms. Kaur on a certificate. Unknown to him, the certificate was later revoked and another certificate granted to Mr. Singh. Having paid in ignorance, Mr. Bedi's payment is held good against claims under Mr. Singh's certificate (s.386). What the holder must do with the money is a separate matter: s.387 keeps the holder's liability to account.
Section 387: later suits and liability to account
Section 387 has two limbs:
- No bar to trial. "No decision under this Part upon any question of right between any parties shall be held to bar the trial of the same question in any suit or in any other proceeding between the same parties."
- Liability to account. "Nothing in this Part shall be construed to affect the liability of any person who may receive the whole or any part of any debt or security, or any interest or dividend on any security, to account therefor to the person lawfully entitled thereto."
The first limb fits the summary nature of the decision in s.373 (see our article on section 373). A certificate decides who may receive and give a good discharge; it does not finally decide who owns. The second limb means a holder who receives a debt, security, interest or dividend must still account to the person lawfully entitled. That also links with the bond required in s.375 for an account and indemnity (see our article on sections 374 and 375).
For the time within which a suit may be filed, see our general guide on limitation periods for suits and appeals; the sections here set no period.
Putting the three together
- Section 385: the first question is whether an earlier grant is in force.
- Section 386: a person who paid in ignorance is safe against claims under any other certificate.
- Section 387: the holder must still account to the person lawfully entitled, and the question of right can be tried again in a suit between the same parties.
Later amendments are not shown in the text consulted and should be checked.
Need help with a disputed certificate?
If you have paid on a certificate that has been questioned, hold one that is challenged, or believe you are the person lawfully entitled, we can explain these sections and help you plan. Start with our legal consultation service.
Key takeaways
- A certificate is invalid if there is a previous grant of a certificate, probate or letters of administration in force for the same estate, save as the Act provides (s.385).
- Payments or dealings with the holder of a superseded or invalid certificate, made in ignorance, are held good against claims under any other certificate (s.386).
- A Part X decision on a question of right does not bar a later trial of the same question between the same parties, and the duty to account to the person lawfully entitled remains (s.387).
Read next
- Sections 383-384: revocation of a succession certificate and appeal
- Sections 388-391: inferior courts, surrender of certificates and savings
- Sections 380-382: local extent and effect of a succession certificate
- Limitation period for filing suits and appeals
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.