EN
BANC
IN
THE MATTER
OF THE ESTATE OF THE LATE LEODEGARIA VILLANUEVA.
ELISA CUISON, ET
AL.,
Petitioners-Appellants,
G.
R.
No. L-3932
February
29, 1952
-versus-
NICOLAS
VILLANUEVA,
ET AL.,
Oppositors-Appellees
FLAVIANO
LACSON,
Judicial
Administrator.
D
E C I S I
O N
MONTEMAYOR,
J :
This
case originating in
the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental involves many facts
but
only those necessary to the solution of the appeal will be stated and
briefly
they are, as follows:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
On February 14, 1939,
Manuel Cuison filed in the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental
a petition for the probate of a document marked exhibit "A", said to be
the last will and testament of Leodegaria Villanueva who died on
December
14, 1938. The heirs instituted in said will were Reynaldo Cuison, a
nephew
of the testatrix and six minor children - Maria Dolores, Hernando,
Leonardo,
Angel, Maria Jimena and Telma, all surnamed Macasa, said to be
grandnephews
and nieces. Petitioner Manuel Cuison was appointed Administrator and he
qualified as such.
The Petition for
Probate
was opposed by Nicolas Villanueva and others who claim to be relatives
of the testatrix.
On January 29, 1941,
the lower court presided over by Judge Sotero Rodas, dismissed the
petition
"por falta de gestión del solicitante". Upon motion of
the
petitioner, the Order of dismissal was reconsidered, the case
reinstated
and later by Order of November 28, 1941, the lower court denied the
probate
of the will and declared that the deceased Leodegaria Villanueva died
intestate.
Upon another motion for reconsideration filed by Manuel Cuison the
order
of denial of probate was reconsidered and Manuel Cuison was ordered to
secure a transcript of the stenographic notes taken during the hearing
of probate held on March 15, 1941. This Order of reconsideration was
dated
December 6, 1941. One or two days later, the Pacific war broke out.
On December 16, 1948,
the oppositors Nicolas Villanueva, et al., moved for the definite
dismissal
of the petition for probate. By order of January 10, 1949, Judge Jose
Teodoro,
then presiding over the trial court, definitely denied the petition for
probate. On January 22, 1949, petitioner Manuel Cuison moved for the
reconsideration
of the order of denial of the petition for probate.
On August 16, 1949,
Elisa, Ricardo, Josefina, Luis, Hermenegilda, all surnamed Cuison, for
the first time, entered this case, claiming to be legitimate brothers
and
sisters of Reynaldo Cuison the nephew of the testatrix Leodegaria
Villanueva
instituted as one of the heirs in the will, exhibit "A". Further
claiming
that said Reynaldo Cuison died intestate on February 12, 1939, about
two
months after the death of the testatrix, they filed a petition for
relief
under Section 2 and 3, Rule 38 of the Rules of Court, from the order of
January 10, 1949 definitely denying probate of the will. The
petitioners
Elisa Cuison, et al., further claimed that Reynaldo Cuison, their
brother,
upon his death, left neither legitimate nor natural acknowledged
children,
consequently, his only heirs are the said petitioners and their brother
Manuel Cuison. The petition for relief was based on the allegation that
they had no actual knowledge of the order of January 10, 1949, denying
the probate of the will, until the month of July, 1949; that up to the
filing of the petition for relief, petitioners had never been direct or
actual parties to the probate proceedings but they were constructive
parties,
since the proceedings were in rem and the order of the denial of
probate
would affect them as heirs of the legatee Reynaldo Cuison; that their
non-appearance
or participation in the probate proceedings may be regarded as
excusable
negligence; and that if they were given a chance, they could prove the
validity and the due execution of the will in question and would
present
the instrumental witnesses. The trial court presided over by Judge
Eduardo
D. Enriquez, acting upon the petition, denied the same by order of
February
18, 1950. However, instead of considering the merits of the Petition
for
Relief, Judge Enriquez based his order of denial on the ground that,
pursuant
to the provisions of Article 925 of the old Civil Code, present
petitioners
have no right to represent their deceased brother, Reynaldo Cuison, in
the inheritance of the testatrix Leodegaria Villanueva. Consequently,
they
have no interest in the will or the property involved and so have no
personality
to intervene in these proceedings by filing the petition for relief. It
is from that order of February 18, 1950, denying the petition for
relief,
that the petitioners Elisa Cuison, et al., are appealing.
The trial court was
right in holding that before any person may intervene in the
proceedings
for the probate of a will, he should show an interest in said will or
the
property affected thereby [Paras vs. Narciso, 35 Phil. 244]. The lower
court was equally right in holding that under Art. 925, paragraph 2, of
the old Civil Code, the right of representation shall take place only
in
favor of children of brothers or sisters, which petitioners Elisa
Cuison
et al., are not. But said trial court erred in holding and assuming
that
petitioners Elisa Cuison et al., were invoking the right to represent
their
brother Reynaldo Cuison, for they were not. They seek to inherit the
legacy
of their brother provided for in the will in their own right and not in
representation of their deceased brother. The law is clear that there
is
representation only when relatives of a deceased person try to succeed
him in his rights which he would have had if still living. In the
present
case, however, said deceased had already succeeded his aunt, the
testatrix
herein, and had acquired the right to the legacy given by her to him,
upon
her death, for the reason that under Arts. 657 and 651 of the old Civil
Code the rights to the succession of a person are transmitted from the
moment of his death and an heir succeeds to all rights and obligations
of the decedent by the mere fact of the latter's death. It is a fact
that
at the time of the death of the testatrix, Reynaldo Cuison was still
alive.
He died two months after her [testatrix's] death. And upon his death,
he
transmitted to his heirs, the petitioners herein Elisa Cuison et al.,
the
legacy or the right to succeed to the legacy, which he received by
virtue
to the will. In other words, the herein petitioners-appellants are not
trying to succeed to the right to the property of the testatrix, but
rather
to the right of the legatee Reynaldo Cuison in said property.
Inasmuch as the
appellants
as heirs of the legatee Reynaldo Cuison, clearly have an interest in
the
will or in the property affected by it, they had the right to intervene
in the probate proceedings and to file the Petition for Relief under
Rule
38 of the Rules of Court.
The Order appealed
from is hereby set aside and this case is ordered remanded to the trial
Court for further proceedings, particularly to rule upon the Petition
for
Relief on the basis of its merits. No pronouncement as to costs. So
ordered.
Paras, C.J., Pablo,
Bengzon, Padilla, Reyes, Jugo and Bautista Angelo, JJ., concur. |