Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1914 > October 1914 Decisions > G.R. No. 8938 October 24, 1914 - PETRONA VILORIA v. ESPERANZA AQUINO

028 Phil 258:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 8938. October 24, 1914. ]

PETRONA VILORIA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ESPERANZA AQUINO, Defendant-Appellant.

Antonio M. Jimenez, for Appellant.

Alberto Reyes, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. HUSBAND AND WIFE; CONJUGAL PROPERTY; PRESUMPTION. — When husband and wife occupy real property during the existence of their marital relations, and there is no proof showing in what manner said property had been acquired, the courts will presume, in the absence of proof, that the property had been acquired during their married life and constitutes conjugal property.


D E C I S I O N


JOHNSON, J. :


This was an action to recover the possession of seven parcels of land described in the second paragraph of the complaint. The plaintiff alleged that she was the owner of said parcels of land and was entitled to the possession of the same, together with damages amounting to P50, caused by the illegal possession of the defendant.

The defendant presented a general denial, together with a special defense. In her special defense the defendant alleged that she was the possessor and the real owner of said parcels of land.

After hearing the evidence, the Honorable Dionisio Chanco, judge, rendered a judgment in which he found that the plaintiff was the owner of one-half of said parcels of land, by inheritance, and directed the defendant to deliver the same to her, giving to the defendant the usufruct of one-third part of the said one-half, in accordance with the provisions of article 838 of the Civil Code. From that decision of the lower court the defendant appealed to this court and made several assignments of error.

From an examination of the record brought to this court, it appears that the plaintiff is the mother-in-law of the defendant; that the husband of the defendant was Genaro Corpus, the son of the plaintiff; that Genaro Corpus died in the month of September, 1911, and the present action was commenced on the 29th of June, 1912. The husband of the plaintiff died some time before the commencement of the present action.

During the trial of the cause the plaintiff attempted to prove that said parcels of land had been given to Genaro Corpus as "propter nuptias" by her husband, Alejo Corpus. The plaintiff also presented proof showing that the parcel of land had been given to Genaro Corpus by his grandmother, Cirila Pizario. The record contains no explanation of this conflict in the proof on the part of the plaintiff.

The defendant presented proof for the purpose of showing that said parcels of land had been given to her by her mother at or about the time of her marriage with Genaro Corpus. The fact is, however, that Genaro Corpus and his wife, the defendant, occupied the parcels of land during practically all of their married life. The record also shows that Genaro Corpus, as early as 1906, had made a declaration of ownership of said parcels of land, for the purpose of taxation. While said declaration, of course, did not show that he was the owner, nevertheless, it sustains the proof presented by both parties, plaintiff and defendant, that he was in possession of the same. The lower court, not being able to find from the proof adduced, in what manner Genaro Corpus and the defendant came into the possession of said land, presumed that the parcels of land constituted "bienes gananciales" [conjugal property] and divided the land between the plaintiff and defendant, as above indicated. When it is shown that a husband and wife occupy real property, as owners, during a portion of their married life, and the proof fails to show in what manner they became owners, it is perfectly proper for the courts to presume, in the absence of other proof, that said property was acquired during their married life and therefore constitutes "bienes gananciales." Considering the property as "bienes gananciales," we find that the division made by the lower court was in accordance with the facts contained in the record and with the law. The judgment of the lower court is therefore hereby affirmed with costs.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Carson, Moreland, Trent and Araullo, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





October-1914 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 7760 October 1, 1914 - E. M. WRIGHT v. MANILA ELECTRIC R. R. & LIGHT CO.

    028 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. 9600 October 1, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. EUGENIO GACUTAN

    028 Phil 128

  • G.R. Nos. 9609, 9610 & 9611 October 2, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. ANASTASIA AVILLAR

    028 Phil 131

  • G.R. No. 8231 October 3, 1914 - PROSPERO K. ALAFRIZ v. PIA MINA

    028 Phil 137

  • G.R. No. 9791 October 3, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. VICENTE F. SOTELO

    028 Phil 147

  • G.R. No. 9378 October 6, 1914 - BENITO RABAJANTE v. P. M. MOIR, ET AL.

    028 Phil 161

  • G.R. No. 9475 October 6, 1914 - JOSE CALDERON v. LA PROVINCIA DEL SANTISIMO ROSARIO DE PP. DOMINICOS DE FILIPINAS

    028 Phil 164

  • G.R. No. 9679 October 6, 1914 - MATEO LABIANO v. W. E. McMAHON, ET AL.

    028 Phil 168

  • G.R. No. 9855 October 6, 1914 - CHUA SHUN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    028 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. 7690 October 9, 1914 - CHUA DOC DE v. ARTADI & COMPANY

    028 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 7944 October 9, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. MASTER OF THE S. S. "TEAN"

    028 Phil 188

  • G.R. No. 8611 October 13, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO GARING

    028 Phil 199

  • G.R. No. 8727 October 13, 1914 - SERAFIN UY PIAOCO v. J. MC-MICKING, ET AL.

    028 Phil 206

  • G.R. No. 9387 October 13, 1914 - TIBURCIA DE LIZA v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    028 Phil 208

  • G.R. No. 9415 October 13, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. ONG TO

    028 Phil 216

  • G.R. No. 9716 October 13, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN V. RAMOS

    028 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. 9247 October 15, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. GENARO PASCA

    028 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. 9030 October 16, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO ROSALES, ET AL.

    028 Phil 228

  • G.R. No. 9772 October 16, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. AGAPITO SERRANO, ET AL.

    028 Phil 230

  • G.R. No. 9305 October 17, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. VICTOR VITUG

    028 Phil 232

  • G.R. No. 9459 October 19, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. SEVERINO CAMARA

    028 Phil 238

  • G.R. No. 9784 October 21, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. ONG SHIU

    028 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 9197 October 22, 1914 - HERMOGENA SANTOS v. MIGUEL ROBLEDO ET AL.

    028 Phil 245

  • G.R. No. 8715 October 24, 1914 - MARIANO VELOSO v. LUCIA MARTINEZ

    028 Phil 255

  • G.R. No. 8938 October 24, 1914 - PETRONA VILORIA v. ESPERANZA AQUINO

    028 Phil 258

  • G.R. No. 8147 October 26, 1914 - G. URRUTIA & CO. v. AMALIA MORENO, ET AL.

    028 Phil 260

  • G.R. No. 9183 October 28, 1914 - EVARISTA SINAPILO v. PETRA GRACIA

    028 Phil 269

  • G.R. No. 9737 October 28, 1914 - HO NINA, ET AL. v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    028 Phil 275

  • G.R. No. 9444 October 29, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. SOFRONIO DE LA CRUZ

    028 Phil 279

  • G.R. No. 9537 October 29, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. FILOMENO CASSION, ET AL.

    028 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. 8746 October 30, 1914 - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL. v. STEAMSHIP ISLAS FILIPINAS

    028 Phil 291

  • G.R. No. 9915 October 30, 1914 - UNITED STATES v. CHIEN SUEY

    028 Phil 300