You are on page 1of 8

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 47931. Junio 27, 1941.]

Testate Estate of Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil. ADRIANO MENDOZA, petitioner,

versus

CALIXTO PILAPIL y OTROS, respondent.

D. Filemon Sotto y D. Numeriano G. Estenzo as representatives of the petitioner.


Sres. Alonso y Alonso as representatives of the respondent.

SYLLABUS

||| (Mendoza v. Pilapil, G.R. No. 47931, [June 27, 1941], 72 PHIL 546-557)
1. WILLS; LEGALIZATION; PROVISION OF THE TEETER THAT HIS TESTAMENT DOES
NOT VENT IN THE COURT. - The disposition of the testator that his "Will and Last Will
not be aired in the Court", can not deprive the Courts of his authority to determine
whether his referred will is legalized or not. The interested parties are not in one way or
another in a matter, which can confer or remove jurisdiction and authority to the Courts
to resolve and decide what the same law wants to be resolved and decided. It must be
borne in mind that the law orders, under penalty of death, that the testaments granted
by a testator be delivered to the court, after the testator dies, by the person to whom it
has been entrusted, in order undoubtedly that it can be determined if appropriate.
legalization and at the same time be able to dispose of their goods as it is mandated in
them; or if, on the contrary, he should be declared intestate dead, because the one he
had granted was not susceptible to legalization. (Arts 626 to 631, Law. No. 190.)

2. ID .; ID; PAGINATION; CLAUSE OF TREATMENT. - And as to the exhibits A and C can


not be legalized because they were not prepared or signed in accordance with the law,
saying that their pages are not numbered with letters; and because in its clause of
assurance it is not stated that they were signed by the three instrumental witnesses, in
the presence of the testator, it is enough to draw attention to the fact that at the bottom
of the first page there are in letters the note that clearly says: " Go to the 2nd page "; and
the fact that, at the bottom of this second page, there is this other note: "Go to the 3rd
page"; and it is enough to draw attention to the first two lines of said third page, which
is the last one, where, to complete the provision enclosed in the last paragraph of the
previous page, or second it is said as follows: ".... It consists of two articles, contains
sixteen provisions and is written in three pages ", which faithfully agrees with the true
facts as they appear in the two exhibits, because they contain two articles and sixteen
provisions, and no more, ||| (Mendoza v. Pilapil, G.R. No. 47931, [June 27, 1941], 72
PHIL 546-557)
3. ID .; ID; ID; ID. - In the testimony clause in one and another copy of the Testament
object of question, it is affirmed by the three instrumental witnesses who signed it, that
"the pre-inserted Testament and last Will, has been subscribed, declared and sworn by
the testator, Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence of all of us "; and then row, also
affirms pol, the same witnesses that: at the request of said Testator, we sign each one of
us, here in Cebu, Cebu, 1. F., today, November 27, 1935. "The phrase" a request of said
Testator ", together with the one of which he signed and signed his will in the presence
of the instrumental witnesses, allows and justifies the inference that the testator was
present when the last ones stamped there their respective signatures.

4. ID .; ID; ID; ID; PURPOSE OF THE LAW. - The purpose of the law in establishing the
formalities required in a will, is undoubtedly ensure and ensure its authenticity against
bad faith and fraud, to prevent those who have no right to succeed the testator, succeed
and leave benefited with the legalization of it. This purpose has been fulfilled in the case
that it has been discussed because, in the same body of the will and on the same page
where the clause of assurance appears, that is, the third, it is stated that the will consists
of three pages; and because each of the first two has in part the note in letters, and
partly the note in figures, which are respectively the first and second pages of it. These
facts evidently exclude any fear, any suspicion, or any hint of doubt that one of their
pages has been replaced with another.

DECISION

The main issues that opponents present us. so for its resolution, when appealing the
decision of the Court of First Instance of Cebu, dictated in the testamentary file No. 407
of said Court, can be reduced to the following:

1. a If the Cebu Court could appoint on March 4, 1939, the appellee as special
administrator of the relic property of the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil (testamentary file
No. 407), being as he was then acting as administrator of the same property, from
February 7, 1939, the appellant Calixto Pilapil, who filed a day before, the Intestate
Documents of the same deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil, in said Court (file No. 399, Court of
Cebu);

2. If it proceeded and proceeds the legalization as a testament or provision of last will


of the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilap.l, of the document in cars as “Exhibit A” which is a
duplicate to the carbon of “Exhibit C”.
The pertinent facts that must be taken into account when resolving the proposed issues
are, as follows from the decision appealed and from the same documents that the Court
declared to be testament and last will of the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil, the following
ones they relate:

Father Eleuterio Pilapil, being a priest of the parish of Mualboal of the Province of
Cebu, died in the city of this name on December 6, 1935. No testament of his had been
presented after his death! At least until the beginning of February 1939, his brother
Calixto Pilapil filed on the 6th day of said month and year, the intestate file No. 399 to
request that he be appointed administrator of the relic property. Received to test the
application that had been submitted for the aforementioned purpose, prior publication
of the notices prescribed by law, and hearing the Court before those who appeared to
oppose it, among which were the same appellee and Simeona Pilapil, the Court granted
it to him, naming him immediately administrator of said Intestate. A few days later, that
is March 4, 1939, the appellee in turn promoted the file No. 407 of which
aforementioned was made, to request the legalization as a testament of the deceased P.
Eleuterio Pilapil, of the Exhibit A is the duplicate to the carbon of Exhibit C. There are
among the clauses of these two documents, which are inserted below for their relevance
to the issues raised and also for the importance they have:

"I, Eleuterio Pilapil, Priest of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, sixty-eight years old,
a native of Liloan, currently, parish priest of the Parish of Mualboal, Province of Cebu,
enjoying health and in FULL use of MY MENTAL FACULTIES, hereby, publicly declare
and grant the following as MY TESTAMENT AND LAST WILL:

"ART. FIRST: I institute and appoint Mr. Adriano rIendoza, my political nephew, married,
of legal age and neighbor of the Municipality of Liloan, Province of Cebu, EXECUTOR of
this my Will and Last Will: Understanding, That , in case of impossibility, negligence or
any other cause with which this Will and Last Will is enforced, by bail, I order and be
replaced in the position of executor of this my Will and Last Will, by my Cousin, Jose
Cabatingan, married, of legal age, resident of the Municipality of Mualboal, Province of
Cebu, who will be responsible for and will enforce these my following provisions:

"2.a I order and order this my Will and Last Will not be aired in the Court, since this Will
and Last Will simply corroborates, affirms and assures the legitimacy of the documents
of sale of my goods;

"SECOND ART.: I hereby state that this My Will and Last Will, which corroborates,
affirms and assures the legitimacy of documents granted by me to buyers, consists of
two articles, contains sixteen provisions and is written in three pages;
"Cebu, Cebu, I. F., hoy dia 27 de noviembre de 1935.
(Firmado)

''ELEUTERIO PILAPIL
"Testador";

at the end of them (exhibits A and C), there is this testimony clause:

"To the one who read:

GREETINGS,

We who sign below, we record. That the pre-inserted Testament and Last Will, has been
subscribed, declared and sworn by the Testator, Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence
of all of us and at the request of said Testator, we sign each of us in the presence of us,
here in Cebu, Cebu today, November 27, 1935.
(Signed) "WENCESLAO PILAPIL
"Testigo
"MARCELO PILAPIL
"Testigo
"EUGENIO K. PILAPIL
"Testigo"
|
The two documents, exhibits A and C, consist of three pages; and on the left margin
of each of the first two, the signatures that appear at the end of the main body of said
documents and of their testimony clause appear, and that are, according to the evidence,
signatures of the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil, and witnesses Wenceslao Pilapil, Marcelo
Pilapil and Eugenio K. Pilapil. In the place of the date both of the two documents and its
clause of attestation, the word Cebu is written on something that has almost been
scraped but can still be seen that it said "Mualboal"; and also appear the figure "27" and
the month name: "November", written the latter on a scraped word that can still be seen
without any difficulty, at least in Exhibit A, which says: "October". In the last paragraph
of page 2 whose continuation appears in the first two lines of the next page, (page 3),
which is the last, there is the following express statement: "contains sixteen provisions
and is written in three pages". At the bottom of pages (1) and (2) there are respectively
these notes: "Go to the 2nd page"; "Go to the 3 'page." And it should be noted that both
the one and the other of the aforementioned Exhibits A and C, there are only two articles
("First Art" and "Second Art"), and sixteen provisions.

The reasons on which the appellants support themselves that the legalization of any
of the two documents as a testament of the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil is not applicable,
these are: (a) That they contain scrapes and alterations that the appellee failed to
explain; (b) That it has not been proven that the deceased, - apart from what is
stated in the aforementioned exhibits A and C -, was of competent age to test; (c)
That it has not been proven that the deceased possessed knowledge in Spanish,
which is the language in which the aforementioned documents appear; (d) That in
one of the clauses of said documents there is a prohibition that they be aired in
the Courts; (e) That neither of the two has been prepared, signed and attested in
accordance with the provisions of Article 618 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

With respect to the first question, it must be said that, according to the same
Appellate Court Appellate Part, the two files Nos. 399 and 407 were brought before two
different Chambers of the Cebu Court of First Instance. The first was promoted in Room
III; and the last, in Room II. Upon hearing the Judge of one of these Chambers that there
was a direct relationship between one and another, he arranged for the two to be known
by a single Judge; Hence, both were considered as one to avoid what the aforementioned
Judge said: "incompatibility in the administration of the said deceased's property",
referring to the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil. Undoubtedly, the Cebu Court did not lack
reason to appoint special administrator in the file No. 407 to the appellee, because in the
documents that there were tried to legalize as a testament and disposition of last will of
the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil, the express order is included that it was. In addition,
there was no law prohibiting the courts that hear of a testamentary or intestate file,
appoint more than one administrator; and, in the case in question, it occurred that the
appointment of the appellant as administrator after the two aforementioned files were
merged became null and void. More still; If the purpose of the appellants in proposing
the question we are talking about, is to nullify the appointment issued in favor of the
appellee as special administrator, vain is and vain has to be said because insisting on the
equivalent to be appealing a order of the Court appointing a special administrator; and
the law does not allow an appeal against orders of that nature. The provision of law that
says: "The appeal against the appointment of said special administrator will not be
allowed." (Art. 660, Law No. 190.) In addition to all this it must be said that, if there was
an error in the appointment of the appellee as special administrator, for the reason that
another proprietor was already appointed by the Court, the error, if such may be called,
has not been such nature that has caused any harm to anyone, and less to the Probate of
the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil.

The scratches and alterations that are noticed in the exhibits A and C constitute facts
that now, for the first time, and in this instance, we want to draw attention to when it
should have been done while the cause has been removed. Judge of its origin. We can not
take them into account in the present state of the proceedings because, assuming that
they existed at that time, it can and should be said, although the Cebu Court did not say
so in express terms, which I believe did not vitiate said documents; it is presumption
juris tantum that "all the facts related to the points discussed in a trial were exposed to
the court and appreciated by him". (Article 334, paragraph 16, Law No. 190.) And they
did not vitiate it in effect, because it follows from the very circumstances of the case,
which were made precisely to put things in their true place. The two exhibits A and C
were prepared by the deceased P. Eleuterio Pilapil in Mualboal where he was a parish
priest, before being transferred to be treated for his illness that caused his death, at
Southern Islands Hospital in Cebu, where he died. When the Court was founded on these
facts that were proved in court, I declare the following: "The intervention of the three
instrumental witnesses of the document took place in a casual way, on occasion when
they went to visit Eleuterio Pilapil who was ill in the Southern Islands Hospital, and
there the today deceased begged them to act as witnesses of the document that I had
then prepared. "

When preparing them, being in Mualboal, it was not more than natural that he
expressed in the same ones that were prepared there, and left blank the date but
without forgetting to put the name of the month in which they were made clean, that is,
October 1935

Regarding the age of the testator and as to whether he spoke Spanish, which is the
language in which the two exhibits are written, or not, it must be said that being a priest
and a priest of the parish of Mualboal, Cebu, it must be presumed that he was of the age
competent to test, and who understood and spoke Spanish, then, it is generally known
that to be a priest of a parish, one must be a priest, and to be a priest, many years of
study are necessary in seminars where Spanish is spoken. A language as official as
English. On the other hand, it does not appear that it has been proven that the testator
did not understand said language.

The disposition of the testator that his "Will and Last Will not be aired in the
Court", can not deprive the Courts of his authority to determine if his referred testament
is legalizable or not. The interested parties are not in one way or another in a matter,
which can confer or remove jurisdiction and authority to the Courts to resolve and
decide what the same law wants to be resolved and decided. It must be borne in mind
that the law orders, under penalty of death, that the testaments granted by a testator be
delivered to the court, after the testator dies, by the person to whom the custody has
been entrusted, in order undoubtedly that it can be determined if appropriate. its
legalization and at the same time be able to dispose of its assets as it is mandated in
them; or if, on the contrary, he should be declared dead intestate, pol. not be susceptible
to legalization that had granted. (Articles 626 to 631, Law No. 190.) Furthermore, not
being a lawyer the testator, it is not surprising that he has consigned in his testament the
prohibition that, - using his same words -, "be aired in the Court" .
And as for the exhibits A and C can not be legalized because they were not
prepared or signed in accordance with the law, saying that their pages are not
numbered with letters; and because in its clause of assurance it is not stated that they
were signed by the three instrumental witnesses, in the presence of the testator, it is
enough to draw attention to the fact that at the bottom of the first page there are in
letters the note that clearly says: " Go to the 2nd page "; and the fact that, at the bottom
of this second page, there is this other note: "Go to the 3rd page"; and it is enough to
draw attention to the first two lines of said third page, which is the last one, where, to
complete the disposition that is the last-paragraph of the previous page, or second, sc
says the following:

"... consists of two articles, contains sixteen provisions and is written in three
pages", which faithfully agrees with the true facts as they appear in the two exhibits,
because they actually contain two articles and sixteen provisions, and no more, and no
less. In the testimony clause in one and another copy of the Testament object of question,
it is affirmed by the three instrumental witnesses who signed it, that

"the pre-inserted Testament and last Will, has been subscribed, declared and sworn by
the Testator, Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence of all of us"; and next line, it is also
affirmed by the same witnesses that:

"At the request of said Testator, we signed each one of us, here in Cebu, Cebu, I. F., today,
November 27, 1935." The flase "at the request of clicho Testador", together with the one
that he signed and signed his will in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, allows
and justifies the inference that the testator was present when the last ones stamped
their respective signatures there. The purpose of the law in establishing the formalities
required in a will, is undoubtedly to ensure and guarantee its authenticity against bad
faith and fraud, to prevent those who have no right to succeed the testator, succeed him
and leave benefited with the legalization of it. This purpose has been fulfilled in the case
that it has been discussed because, in the same body of the will and on the same page
where the clause of assurance appears, that is, the third, it is stated that the will consists
of three pages and because each one of the first two is partly the note in letters, and
partly the note in figures, which are respectively the first and second pages of it. These
facts evidently exclude any fear, any suspicion, or any hint of doubt that one of their
pages has been replaced with another. Something more than in the case of Nayve against
Mojal and Aguilar (47 Jur. Fil., 160), which was clarified by the Gumban case against
Gorecho and others (50 Jur. Fil., 31), there is in the present case because there was no
more than the notes "Page 1"; "Pag. 2"; "Page 3"; and "Page 4" on the respective face of
the four pages of which it is composed, and in the present there are the aforementioned
clauses and there is also the substance inserted in the first two lines of the third page of
the exhibits. and C, that they are composed of three pages, and contain two articles and
sixteen provisions.
They are therefore of perfect application to the case in question what we said in
Rodriguez's case against Yap, R. G. No. 45924, May 18, 1939; and Blissful against De
Gorostiza (57 Jur. Fil., 456). We said in these causes, respectively, the following: "The
wording of the testimony clause in this will is not technically free of objections,
but, it is substantially sufficient compliance with the law. We maintain the
criterion that strict compliance with the substantive requirements of the will
must be required to ensure its authenticity, but, at the same time, we believe that
defects should not be taken into account in a way that can not affect this purpose
and that, on the other hand, , if taken into account, could frustrate the will of the
testator. "(Rodriguez v. Yap, supra.) "Legal formalities should not be allowed to hinder
the use of good common sense in the consideration of wills and to frustrate the
deceased's solemnly expressed in their wills, as to whose grant there is not even a
shadow of bad faith or fraud " (Blissful against De Gorostiza, supra.) For all of the above,
having found the decision of the Court of First Instance of Cebu up to right, we hereby
confirm it, condemning the appellants to pay the costs. This is how it is ordered.
Avanceña, Pres., Diaz, Laurel, Moran, and Honrilleno, MM., Are satisfied.

SEPARATE OPINIONS

The testimony clause is as follows:

"We who sign below, we state: That the pre-inserted Will and Last Will, has been
subscribed, declared and sworn by the Testator, Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence
of all of us and at the request of said Testator, we sign each one of us in our presence,
here in Cebu, Cebu, IF, today, November 27, 1935. "

It is not stated in this clause that the witnesses instrumentale6 have signed the will in
the presence of the testator and, therefore, the will can not be legalized. But most argue
that "the phrase 'at the request of said Testator,' coupled with that of which he signed
and signed his will in the presence of the instrumental witnesses, allows and justifies the
inference that the testator was present when the latter stamped there his respective
signatures. " But, we have already said repeatedly that the solemnities of a will required
by the law can not be accredited by tests aluinde Therefore, evidence of inference is
inadmissible, especially if the inference is not entirely adjusted to the logic.

For these reasons, I disagree with the opinion of the majority.

You might also like