ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1958 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-10947 March 18, 1958 - JOSE MAYOR v. MACARIO MILLAN

    103 Phil 132

  • G.R. No. L-13001 March 18, 1958 - ALFREDO ABCEDE v. DOMINGO IMPERIAL

    103 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. L-10694 March 20, 1958 - MULLER & PHIPPS (MANILA) v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    103 Phil 145

  • G.R. No. L-10911 March 21, 1958 - MANILA BLUE PRINTING CO. v. TEACHERS COLLEGE

    103 Phil 151

  • G.R. No. L-10579 March 22, 1958 - ELIZABETH CONSTANTINO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    103 Phil 153

  • G.R. No. L-10625 March 22, 1958 - RIZAL MANILA TRANSIT v. CRESENTE VICTORINO

    103 Phil 158

  • G.R. No. L-9433 March 24, 1958 - MATERIAL DISTRIBUTORS (PHIL.) v. MILES TIMBER AND TRANSPORT CORPORATION

    103 Phil 162

  • G.R. No. L-10841 March 24, 1958 - STONEHILL STEEL CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

    103 Phil 170

  • G.R. No. L-10894 March 24, 1958 - PACIFIC TOBACCO CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    103 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. L-10137 March 25, 1958 - ELOISA C. AGUILAR v. SERAFIN R. GAMBOA

    103 Phil 183

  • G.R. No. L-10578 March 25, 1958 - FELIPE ATAYDE v. PASTOR DE GUZMAN

    103 Phil 187

  • G.R. No. L-11721 March 26, 1958 - INOCENCIA ESPINOSA v. BERNABE DE AQUINO

    103 Phil 195

  • G.R. No. L-5707 March 27, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO VERSOLA

    103 Phil 201

  • G.R. No. L-10929 March 27, 1958 - RAMONA ESCOTO DE MIRANDA v. PASTOR P. REYES

    103 Phil 207

  • G.R. No. L-8831 March 28, 1958 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. FELICISIMO ARROZAL

    103 Phil 213

  • G.R. No. L-9069 March 28, 1958 - VICENTE UY CHAO v. MANUEL AGUILAR, ET AL.

    103 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. L-9979 March 28, 1958 - IN RE: MARIA EBREO, ET AL. v. ASUNCION EBREO DE BORROMEO

    103 Phil 223

  • G.R. No. L-11232 March 28, 1958 - INTERNATIONAL v. NICASIO YATCO

    103 Phil 226

  • G.R. Nos. L-9556 & L-12630 March 29, 1958 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO GARCELLANO, ET AL.

    103 Phil 231

  • G.R. No. L-10651 March 29, 1958 - LUIS BUENAVENTURA v. DAMASO STO. DOMINGO, ET AL.

    103 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. L-10676 March 29, 1958 - FELICIANO ABAD vs.GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES

    103 Phil 247

  • G.R. No. L-11086 March 29, 1958 - PILAR ATILANO v. CHUA CHING BENG

    103 Phil 255

  • G.R. No. L-11229 March 29, 1958 - MANUEL DIAZ v. CARMEN GORRICHO, ET AL.

    103 Phil 261

  • G.R. No. L-11295 March 29, 1958 - SILVERIO BLAQUERA v. JOSE S. RODRIGUEZ

    103 Phil 267

  • G.R. No. L-11324 March 29, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. YU BAO

    103 Phil 271

  • G.R. Nos. L-10364 & L-10376 March 31, 1958 - RUFINO T. SAMSON v. COURT OF APPEALS

    103 Phil 277

  • G.R. No. L-10969 March 31, 1958 - DALMACIO DE LOS ANGELES v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    103 Phil 295

  • G.R. Nos. L-11487-88 March 31, 1958 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO HUFANA

    103 Phil 304

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. L-10947   March 18, 1958 - JOSE MAYOR v. MACARIO MILLAN<br /><br />103 Phil 132

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-10947. March 18, 1958.]

    JOSE MAYOR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MACARIO MILLAN, WILFREDO MISA and SEVERO MISA, Defendants-Appellees.

    Moises Ma. Buhain for Appellant.

    Nemesio Balonso for Appellees.


    SYLLABUS


    1. DONATION; RESTRICTION ON THE RIGHT TO DONATE; LIMIT OF ONE-TENTH, HOW COMPUTED. — Article 1331 of the Civil Code of 1889 did not restrict the donor to a tenth of each and every item of property he owns; the limit of one-tenth must be computed on the value of his entire patrimony, just as the free part is computed on the value of a testator’s net assets as a whole, in order to determine whether or not his donations are inofficious. (Cf. Civil Code of 1889, Article 654; new Civil Code, Article 771.)


    D E C I S I O N


    REYES, J. B. L., J.:


    Appealed to this Court on points of law is the decision of the Court of First Instance of Zambales (Civil Case No. 1489) dismissing appellant’s complaint to recover nine-tenths (9/10) of a parcel of land in sitio Bungao, barrio Pamloran, Sta. Cruz, Zambales, covered by Tax Declaration No. 34396.

    When the case was called for hearing in the court below, the parties submitted the following stipulation of facts:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "1. The parties admit that the plaintiff, Jose Mayor is the only surviving brother of Severino Mayor;

    2. That Severino Mayor donated the land described in the complaint to Iluminada Miraflor in consideration of his marriage to her, as per the deed of donation, a public instrument, dated October 25, 1927, marked as Annex "A", and that the signature appearing on said Annex "A" which reads "Jose Mayor" is the signature of the plaintiff, Jose Mayor;

    3. That Severino Mayor and Iluminada Miraflor were married at Sta. Cruz, Zambales, on November 15, 1927, as per the certificate of the Municipal Treasurer of Santa Cruz, Zambales, dated August 4, 1952, marked as Annex "B" ;

    4. That Candida Mayor is the daughter of the spouses, Severino Mayor and Iluminada Miraflor, who was born on October 23, 1928, as per Annex "C" ;

    5. That Severino Mayor died at Sta. Cruz, Zambales on January 30, 1929, as per Annex "D" ;

    6. That Candida Mayor, the daughter, died at Infanta, Pangasinan on September 25, 1929, as per Annex "E" ;

    7. That Iluminada Miraflor sold the land described in the complaint to the defendants, Severo Misa, in a public instrument dated April 9, 1932, as per Annex "F" ;

    8. That the defendant, Severo Misa, donated the land described in the complaint to Juana Montevirgen, in consideration of her marriage to his son, Wilfredo Misa, one of the defendants, in a public instrument dated May 16, 1933, as per Annex "G" ;

    9. That the defendant, Wilfredo Misa and his wife, Juana Montevirgen sold the land described in the complaint to the defendants, Macario Millan, in a public instrument, dated March 20, 1949, as per Annex "H" ;

    10. That the defendant, Macario Millan is now the one in possession of the land since March 28, 1949, up to the present time and enjoying the products thereof for his own exclusive use; and that his possession thereto, including those of his predecessors in interest, Iluminada Miraflor, and the defendants, Severo Misa, Wilfredo Misa, is more than 24 years up to the time the complaint was filed under claim of ownership of said land described in the complaint;

    11. That the late Severino Mayor was not survived by any ascendant, sister, nephew or niece except the lone surviving brother, the plaintiff, Jose Mayor;

    12. That the parcel of land described in the complaint was the only property (parcel of land) registered in the name of Severino Mayor, as the former owner, according to the records of the Municipal Treasurer of Sta. Cruz, Zambales, marked as Annex "I" ;

    13. That the entire parcel of land described in the complaint was donated in consideration of marriage by Severino Mayor to Iluminada Miraflor, as per Annex "A" above;

    14. That the defendants, Severo Misa, Wilfredo Misa and Macario Millan had received annually as net share of the land described in the complaint, thirty (30) cavans of palay since the year 1932 up to the present;

    15. That the price per cavan of palay for the years 1932 to 1940, was P2.50; and during the Japanese occupation, P15, Philippine money; and from the year 1945 to date at P10, per cavan." (Rec. App. pp. 17- 18).

    The theory of the appellant, which he also advances on appeal, is predicated on Art. 1331 of the old Civil Code of 1889, in force in 1927 when the donation was made.

    "ART. 1331. Affianced persons may give to one another by their ante-nuptial contract not to exceed one tenth of their present property; with respect to their future property they may make donations to each other to take effect only in case of the donor’s death, within the limits established by this code with respect to testamentary successions."cralaw virtua1aw library

    Appellant argues that under this article the donation by Severino Mayor in favor of his then prospective bride (who later became his wife) was valid only as to one-tenth (1/10) of the lot in question; that the donor retained ownership of nine tenths (9/10) thereof; that upon Severino’s death this interest was transmitted to his daughter Candida Mayor, who died in 1929 and was succeeded by her mother, Illuminada Miraflor; that the latter inherited the property from her daughter but subject to reserva troncal (under Art. 811 of the old Code 1) in favor of plaintiff herein who, as an uncle of Candida, was within the third degree of relationship from her. Hence, appellant concludes, upon the death of the reservista Iluminada Miraflor, appellant became entitled to nine-tenths (9/10) of the property as reversioner, and the alienation made by the aforesaid reservista, as well as all subsequent alienations of the property in favor of other parties, became void.

    The appeal must be dismissed. As the trial judge, Hon. Lucas Lacson, correctly pointed out, there is no proof that the value of the entire lot donated exceeded 1/10 of the property owned by the donor at the time of the donation. Article 1331 of the then Civil Code of 1889 (in force at the time) did not restrict the donor to a tenth of each and every item of property he owns; the limit of one-tenth must be computed on the value of his entire patrimony, just as the free part is computed on the value of a testator’s net assets as a whole, in order to determine whether or not his donations are inofficious (cf. Civil Code of 1889, Art. 654; new Civil Code, Art. 771).

    Under the facts stipulated, there remain two alternatives, either of which suffices to destroy the basic assumption upon which appellant’s case rests: that Severino Mayor had other lands elsewhere than in Zambales; or that, assuming he held no immovable property other than the lot now in question, that he might possess personal property worth nine times the value of the controverted land. Being the one who contests the validity of the donation, it was incumbent upon appellant to produce satisfactory proof to exclude both alternatives, i.e., to show that the donor had no other property besides the disputed lot; and his duty to do so is all the more imperative because the land in question is now in the hands of innocent parties. Not having satisfied the onus probandi, appellant’s cause of action was rightly rejected by the court below.

    The decision appealed from is affirmed with costs against appellant. So ordered.

    Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Endencia and Felix, JJ., concur.

    Footnote

    1. Article 891, New Civil Code.

    G.R. No. L-10947   March 18, 1958 - JOSE MAYOR v. MACARIO MILLAN<br /><br />103 Phil 132




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED