NERI, ET AL, vs. AKUTIN
ELEUTERIO NERI, ET AL, vs. IGNACIA AKUTIN AND HER CHILDREN
G.R. No. L-47799 June 13, 1941
MORAN, J.:
Facts:
Agripino
Neri y Chavez, who died on December 12, 1931, had by his first marriage six
children named Eleuterio, Agripino, Agapito, Getulia, Rosario and Celerina; and
by his second marriage with Ignacia Akutin, five children named Gracia,
Godofredo, Violeta, Estela Maria, and Emma. Getulia, daughter in the first
marriage, died on October 2, 1923, that is, a little less than eight years
before the death of said Agripino Neri y Chavez, and was survived by seven
children named Remedios, Encarnacion, Carmen, Trinidad, Luz, Alberto and Minda.
In Agripino Neri's testament, which was admitted to probate on March 21, 1932,
he willed that his children by the first marriage shall have no longer any
participation in his estate, as they had already received their corresponding
shares during his lifetime. At the hearing for the declaration of heirs, the
trial court found, contrary to what the testator had declared in his will, that
all his children by the first and second marriages intestate heirs of the
deceased without prejudice to one-half of the improvements introduced in the
properties during the existence of the last conjugal partnership, which should
belong to Ignacia Akutin.
Issue:
Whether,
upon the foregoing facts, the omission of the children of the first marriage
annuls the institution of the children of the first marriage as sole heirs of
the testator
Ruling:
Preterition
consists in the omission in the testator's will of the forced heirs or anyone
of them, either because they are not mentioned therein, or, though mentioned,
they are neither instituted as heirs nor are expressly disinherited.
In
the instant case, while the children of the first marriage were mentioned in
the will, they were not accorded any share in the heriditary property, without
expressly being disinherited. It is, therefore, a clear case of preterition as
contended by appellants. The omission of the forced heirs or anyone of them,
whether voluntary or involuntary, is a preterition if the purpose to disinherit
is not expressly made or is not at least manifest. Except as to "legacies
and betterments" which "shall be valid in so far as they are not
inofficious, preterition avoids the institution of heirs and gives rise to
intestate succession.
In
the instant case, no such legacies or betterments have been made by the
testator. "Mejoras" or betterments must be expressly provided,
according to articles 825 and 828 of the Civil Code, and where no express
provision therefor is made in the will, the law would presume that the testator
had no intention to that effect. In the will here in question, no express
betterment is made in favor of the children by the second marriage; neither is
there any legacy expressly made in their behalf consisting of the third
available for free disposal. The whole inheritance is accorded the heirs by the
second marriage upon the mistaken belief that the heirs by the first marriage
have already received their shares. Were it not for this mistake, the
testator's intention, as may be clearly inferred from his will, would have been
to divide his property equally among all his children.
Adjudication:
Judgment
of the Court of Appeals is reversed and that of the trial court affirmed,
without prejudice to the widow's legal usufruct, with costs against
respondents.
Comments
Post a Comment