Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > February 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. L-3751 February 21, 1908 - EDUARDA BENEDICTO v. JULIO JAVELLANA

010 Phil 197:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-3751. February 21, 1908. ]

EDUARDA BENEDICTO, administratrix of the estate of Maximino Jalandoni, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JULIO JAVELLANA, Defendant-Appellant.

C. Ledesma, for Appellant.

Rothrock and Foss, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. ESTATES; CONSTRUCTION OF WILLS. — The will of the testator clearly and explicitly stated must be respected and complied with as an inviolable law among the parties in interest, and the words composing the will should be plainly construed in order to avoid a violation of his intentions and purpose, according to the doctrine established by the courts and constantly maintained in a great number of decisions, among which are those of March 24, 1863, April 28, 1882, and December 16, 1903. (Supreme court of Spain.)

2. ID.; LEGACIES SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS. — A disposition made by the testator imposing on the entire inheritance the obligation to pay his debts with the products thereof, and stating the manner in which the same should be carried out until fully complied with, is not contrary to law. (Art. 1027, Civil Code, and sec. 728, Code of Civil Procedure.)

3. ID.; TESTATOR’S RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF ALL PROPERTY. — A testator who at the time of his death left no heirs designated by law was free to dispose of his property as he thought fit, as no disposition he might make would injure any right covered by the law which protects the legitimate portions of such heirs.

4 ID.; ALL LEGACIES SUBJECT TO IMPLIED CONDITIONS. — The exemption from liability for the payment of the debts and other expenses of the estate which is enjoyed by specific legacies, under section 729 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is subject to the implied condition that there shall be sufficient other property not in the nature of specific legacies, and that the court considers it necessary to comply; with the will of the testator.

5 ID.; LEGATEES OR HEIRS. — The persons interested in a testate inheritance which is divided into legacies may be designated indiscriminately as legatees or heirs.

6. ID.; WILLS; PROBATE JURISDICTION. — Any incident which might arise in connection with special proceedings, such as impugning the validity of a will, or objecting to the authentication thereof, and all demands and claims filed by any heirs, legatee, or party in interest to a testate or intestate succession, shall be acted upon and decided in the same special proceedings, and not in a separate action, and the judge who has jurisdiction of the administration of the inheritance, and who, when the time comes, will be called upon to divide and adjudicate it to the interested parties, shall take cognizance of all such questions. (Sec. 551 et seq., Code of Civil Procedure.)


D E C I S I O N


TORRES, J. :


For the purpose of enforcing the terms of the will made on the 26th of June, 1903, by Maximo Jalandoni, resident of Jaro, the brother of the testator, Maximino Jalandoni, petitioned by a writing dated August 20, 1906, that the administrator or executor, Julio Javellana, be directed to pay him the sum of P985 which he held in lieu of the land donated to petitioner. To this end he alleged that according to the said will, one-half of the hacienda "Lantad", situated in the pueblo of Silay, Occidental Negros, had been bequeathed to him, which gift was subject to the payment of certain debts and expenses of the estate, with respect to the products of the years 1903 and 1904 only, and which had already been applied to that object by the administrator, Javellana; that one-half of said hacienda was sold with the consent of the administrator, the sum P985 remaining in the possession of the latter, from the entire proceeds of the sale, to meet any just or lawful claim which might arise against the gift made to him, or until such time as the court should confirm the legacy; that, as the administrator had already received the products of the hacienda, he is no longer entitled to retain any portion of the legacy, nor demand that he should respond for other debts or expenses of the estate, because with the value of the portion inherited by the heirs Francisco Jalandoni and Sofia Jalandoni, there was more than would be required to pay the other debts of the estate, and the expenses.

Owing to the death of the plaintiff, Eduarda Benedicto, the administratrix of his estate, represented him.

The administrator of the estate, Julio Javellana, in answer to the above motion, alleged that it was not proper to ask, by means of a motion, for the relief that Maximino Jalandoni claimed, but that a complaint should have been filed and action brought against the other legatees, or rather against all the parties concerned in the estate, and not against the administrator alone; that Francisco Jalandoni and Sofia Jalandoni should not be considered as heirs but simply as the legatees of the testator, and that they are in the same position as the petitioner, Maximino Jalandoni, with respect to the charges against the estate; that the obligation to pay all the debts of the same was imposed on the entire inheritance, and not any particular property, nor on any determined party in interest named in the will; and that the amount in deposit with the administrator was not P985 but P949.29, voluntarily deposited not only to pay certain debts but also to meet all the charges against the estate and proportionately by the share allotted to Maximino Jalandoni, as had been done by applying the said sum toward the payment of debts, and for other reasons appearing therein.

The pertinent clauses or paragraphs of the will above referred to are as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"The hacienda "Malogo," owned by me and situated in the pueblo of Eustaquio Lopez, Province of Occidental Negros, P.I., and one parcel of land situated in the pueblo of Mandurriao, Province of Iloilo, P.I., I bequeath to Jose Jalbuena, the son of Benito Jalbuena, to whom I profess particular affection, having taken care of him in my own house from his most tender age.

"I institute Francisco Jalandoni and Sofia Jalandoni, the children of my late brother Nicolas Jalandoni, whose memory is so dear to me for the favors I have received of him, as heirs to all the property real and personal, which I own in the Province of Iloilo, P.I., with the exception of the parcel of land previously assigned to Jose Jalbuena, which property shall be divided between the above-mentioned heirs in equal parts.

"It is my will that my hacienda denominated "Lantad" shall be divided one half to my brother, Maximino Jalandoni, and the other half to the sisters Maria, Felisa, and Felicidad Jalandoni, daughters of Nazaria Hojilla.

"On my entire estate I impose the obligation that out of the products thereof, all my debts shall be paid, the same being about 2,300 pesos which I owe Francisco Villanueva, without interest, and 2,550 pesos which I received on loan from Julio Javellana, with interest thereon at the rate of 10 percent per annum, provided, however, that one-half of the products which each parcel of land pertaining to the estate may yield this year shall be devoted to the payment of said debts, and should the said one-half not prove sufficient to meet the liabilities, two-thirds of the said products, or the total amount thereof, shall be applied; and provided, further, that in any case, the balance of such products shall remain in charge of the administrator for the settlement of such other charges as the estate may be subjected to.

"And further on Francisco and Sofia Jalandoni I particularly impose the obligation to pay Teodora Berola, for a period of ten years, an annuity of 300 pesos, Mexican currency, or the equivalent thereof in Philippine currency; said obligation becoming extinguished by the death of the said Teodora, in case of her demise before the expiration of the said period of ten years."cralaw virtua1aw library

The judge in view of the result of the proceedings issued an order on the 27th of October, 1906, granting the motion filed by the legatee Maximino Jalandoni, as stated therein, from which order the opponent appealed to this court.

From the printed and certified copy of the proceedings, and from the will inserted therein, it appears that the testator, Maximo Jalandoni, on his death, left no lawful ascendants or descendants having any direct claim as hereditary successors.

It also appears, by the will in question, that the testator has distributed all his property in legacies, and that, notwithstanding the manner in which he designates his nephews Francisco and Sofia Jalandoni in paragraph 3 of the same, in order to leave in their favor all the real and personal property that he owned in Iloilo, with the exception of the parcel of land situated in Mandurriao, bequeathed to Jose Jalbuena, the truth is that such nephews of the testator are likewise legatees the same as the last beneficiary under paragraph two of the said will.

Respect for the will of a testator as expressed in his last testamentary disposition, constitutes the principal basis of the rules which the law prescribes for the correct interpretation of all of the clauses of the will; the words and provisions therein written must be plainly construed in order to avoid a violation of his intentions and real purpose.

The will of the testator clearly and explicitly stated must be respected and complied with as an inviolable law among the parties in interest. such is the doctrine established by the Supreme Court of Spain, constantly maintained in a great number of decisions, among which are those of March 24, 1863, April 28, 1882, and December 16, 1903.

The testator, under clause 5 of his will, has imposed on his entire estate the obligation to pay his debts with the products of the same, and has prescribed the manner in which the same shall be done until all obligations are extinguished.

Such a testamentary disposition is not contrary to law, and as a matter of fact article 1027 of the Civil Code provides that —

"The administrator can not pay the legacies until he has paid all the creditors."cralaw virtua1aw library

Section 728 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"If the testator makes provision by his will, or designates the estate to be appropriated for the payment of his debts and the expenses of administration or family expenses, they shall be paid according to the provisions of the will. But if the provision made by the will or the estate appropriated is not sufficient for that purpose, such part of the estate of the testator, real or personal, as is not disposed of by will, if any shall be appropriated for that purpose."cralaw virtua1aw library

Therefore, in accordance with the above legal provisions and with the doctrine established by the courts, the aforesaid will of the late Maximo Jalandoni must be complied with and carried into execution; and, considering that all those who are benefited thereby have not received from the testator a universal succession to his estate, but certain property expressly stated in his will, they should, under the law be considered merely as legatees, without the right to received their share of the property of the deceased until after his debts have been paid. (Secs. 729, 731 and 754, Code of Civil Procedure).

None of the parties interested in the will of Maximo Jalandoni is invested with the character of heir designated by law, and consequently, the provisions he has incorporated in his last will do not injure any of the rights covered by the law which protects the legitimate portions of such heirs. Article 858 of the Civil Code reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"A testator may charge with legacies and bequests not only his heir, but also the legatees.

"The latter shall not be liable for the charge except to the extent of the value of the legacy."cralaw virtua1aw library

Article 859, following provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"When the testator charges one of the heirs with a legacy the latter only shall be obliged to fulfill the same.

"Should he not charge any one in particular, all shall be liable in the same proportion in which they may be heirs."cralaw virtua1aw library

It is to be noticed that in the present case, where the whole of the inheritance was distributed by legacies, the parties in interest are indiscriminately designated as heirs or legatees.

As to specific devices, section 729 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides exemption from the payment of debts and expenses if there is sufficient other property and if it appears to the court necessary to carry into effect the intention of the testator; and, as the legacies stated in the aforesaid will consist of specific property, less the annuity provided for by clause 6, which is made a special lien upon the property for by clause 6, which is made a special lien upon the property bequeathed to Francisco and Sofia Jalandoni, it is unquestionable that in this case the debts and expenses of the estate must be paid pro rata by the legatees in the manner provided in the will, or in accordance with the provisions of sections 753 and 754 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

On the other hand, and for such effects as may be proper, it should be stated herein that any challenge to the validity of a will, any objection to the authentication thereof, and every demand or claim which any heir, legatee, or party in interest in a testate or intestate succession may make, must be acted upon and decided within the same special proceedings not in a separate action and the same judge having jurisdiction in the administration of the estate shall take cognizance of the question raised, inasmuch as when the day comes he will be called upon to make distribution and adjudication of the property to the interested parties, as may be seen in part II of the Code of Civil Procedure, from section 551 forward.

By the foregoing it has been shown that the judgment appealed from is not in accordance with the law, therefore it is our opinion that the same should be reversed, and that the request of the representative of Maximino Jalandoni, now sustained by Eduarda Benedicto, the administratrix of his estate, should be dismissed without any special ruling as to costs. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Willard and Tracey, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






February-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3720 February 3, 1908 - MARIA COSIO v. ANTONINO, ET AL.

    010 Phil 72

  • G.R. No. L-3971 February 3, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. HILARIO BRAGANZA, ET AL.

    010 Phil 79

  • G.R. No. L-4005 February 3, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RUFO REYES

    010 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. L-3806 February 4, 1908 - MARIANO MADAMBA v. PELAGIA MAGNO

    010 Phil 86

  • G.R. No. L-3860 February 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FAUSTINO TREMOYA

    010 Phil 89

  • G.R. No. L-3906 February 5, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JACINTO PAGUIA

    010 Phil 90

  • G.R. No. L-4125 February 5, 1908 - FREDERICK GARFIELD WAITE v. F. THEODORE ROGERS

    010 Phil 94

  • G.R. No. L-4552 February 5, 1908 - ARTHUR F. YAMBERT v. J. MCMICKING

    010 Phil 95

  • G.R. No. L-4092 February 6, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. DANIEL CAMPO

    010 Phil 97

  • G.R. No. L-4165 February 8, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SIMEON GAMALINDA, ET AL.

    010 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. L-3962 February 10, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LING SU FAN

    010 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. L-4251 February 10, 1908 - CLEMENTE MANOTOC v. JOSE MCMICKING

    010 Phil 119

  • G.R. No. L-4193 February 11, 1908 - ISIDORO SANTOS v. MODESTO REYES

    010 Phil 123

  • G.R. No. L-4108 February 12, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. DOROTEO GALIT QUINTO

    010 Phil 126

  • G.R. No. L-4217 February 12, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CEFERINO CAUAS

    010 Phil 131

  • G.R. No. L-4328 February 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JOSE CRAME

    010 Phil 135

  • G.R. No. 3870 February 14, 1908 - LAZARO REMO ET AL. v. PASTOR ESPINOSA

    010 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. L-3974 February 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ISIDRO JAMERO

    010 Phil 137

  • G.R. No. L-3770 February 17, 1908 - CARLOS PABIA SY CHUNG-QUIONG v. FELIPA SY-TIONG TAY CUANSI

    010 Phil 141

  • G.R. No. L-3939 February 17, 1908 - MENDEZONA & CO. v. MARIANO MORENO

    010 Phil 144

  • G.R. No. L-4043 February 17, 1908 - ROMAN DE LA ROSA v. GREGORIO REVITA SANTOS

    010 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. L-3898 February 18, 1908 - CITY OF MANILA v. TOMAS CABANGIS

    010 Phil 151

  • G.R. No. L-4014 February 18, 1908 - GENARO HEREDIA v. RAMON SALINAS

    010 Phil 157

  • G.R. No. L-4139 February 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN SAN LUIS

    010 Phil 163

  • G.R. No. L-4195 February 18, 1908 - ATLANTIC v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS

    010 Phil 166

  • G.R. No. L-3793 February 19, 1908 - CIRILO MAPA v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    010 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. L-3875 February 19, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JANUARIO FRANCISCO

    010 Phil 185

  • G.R. No. L-3998 February 19, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. POMPOSO BURGUETA, ET AL.

    010 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. L-4319 February 19, 1908 - STRONG & TROWBRIDGE v. VAN BUSKIRK-CROOK CO.

    010 Phil 190

  • G.R. No. L-4335 February 19, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO LINDIO

    010 Phil 192

  • G.R. No. L-3967 February 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO MAQUILAN

    010 Phil 193

  • G.R. No. L-3751 February 21, 1908 - EDUARDA BENEDICTO v. JULIO JAVELLANA

    010 Phil 197

  • G.R. No. L-4402 February 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELIX YAPE, ET AL.

    010 Phil 204

  • G.R. No. L-3937 February 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN SALUD

    010 Phil 206

  • G.R. No. L-4138 February 25, 1908 - SY HONG ENG v. SY LIOC SUY

    010 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. L-4489 February 25, 1908 - RAMON HONTIVEROS v. JOSE C. ABREU

    010 Phil 213

  • G.R. No. L-4512 February 25, 1908 - GREGORIO ABENDAN v. MARTIN LLORENTE

    010 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. L-3960 February 27, 1908 - GIL HERMANOS v. JOHN S. HORD

    010 Phil 218

  • G.R. No. L-4159 February 27, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN GALLEGO

    010 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. L-4255 February 27, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JULIO AUTIZ

    010 Phil 223

  • G.R. No. L-4576 February 27, 1908 - MAURO NAVARRO v. CASIANO GIMENEZ

    010 Phil 226

  • G.R. No. L-4189 February 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SEYMOUR ADDISON

    010 Phil 230

  • G.R. No. L-4298 February 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO MARAVILLA

    010 Phil 233

  • G.R. No. L-4366 February 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN GARCIA

    010 Phil 240

  • G.R. No. L-3471 February 28, 1908 - INT’L. BANKING CORP. v. FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

    010 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. L-3472 February 29, 1908 - INT’L. BANKING CORP. v. FRANCISCO MARTINEZ

    010 Phil 252

  • G.R. No. L-4067 February 29, 1908 - FREDERICK E. MOREY v. LAO LAYCO

    010 Phil 258

  • G.R. No. L-4346 February 29, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARIANO PESCADOR

    010 Phil 260

  • G.R. No. L-4469 February 29, 1908 - FELIPE G. CALDERON v. JOSE MCMICKING

    010 Phil 261