8/13/2019 Postigo vs. Borjal

1/3

1

[G. R. No. 3643. March 23, 1909.]

AMBROSIA POSTIGO, Petitioner - Appellant , vs. O!OR"S BOR#A!, Respondent - Appellee .

" $ I S I O N

TORR"S, J.:

On the 2d of September, 1903, Enrique Borjal executed his ill and testament, of hich thefollo in! extract is pertinent to this issue" chanrobles #irtuala librar$

%& hereb$ declare that & ha#e been married to 'o(a )mbrosia *osti!o for nearl$ t ent$+fi#e$ears, and that e ha#e had no issue durin! our marria!e & also declare that all our propert$,ith the exception of t o parcels of land in the sitio of -ara$ca$on .i!naro$ as acquireddurin! marria!e /he first of these parcels is bounded on the north b$ the !reat i#er Baratonhere follo s the description the second, or that of .i!naro$, is bounded on the north

description follo s )ll of said propert$ shall be administered b$ m$ ife for the space of four$ears in order to satisf$ all of our debts, particularl$ that due to 'on 'omin!o 4onasterio )tthe expiration of the four $ears m$ ife shall transfer the parcels in .i!naro$ hich extend fromthe !reat i#er Bara$on do n to the )rro$o de .i!naro$ description follo s to m$ sisters'olores Borjal 5

On the 26th of 7o#ember, 1908, the -ourt of irst &nstance of )mbos -amarines appointedcommissioners to appraise the propert$ of the deceased /he$ submitted to the court their reporton the 30th of October, 190:, statin! that the$ too; the oath of office before the justice of the

peace of /i!aon and immediatel$ proceeded to assess the propert$ presented b$ theadministratrix of the estate )t the same time the$ published notices summonin! all creditorsho had claims a!ainst the said propert$ and fixed the 1:th and 30th da$ of each month for the

hearin! of claims /he first hearin! b$ the commissioners too; place on the 30th of 'ecember,1908 successi#e ones ere held on the 1:th and 30th of each month from

8/13/2019 Postigo vs. Borjal

2/3

2

deceased illed to his sister, 'olores Borjal, ma$ be considered as set aside, and the usufruct ofthe said propert$ bequeathed to his ido , )mbrosia *osti!o, for the period of four $ears fromthe death of the testator for the purposes of meetin! the debts of the estate, particularl$ thato in! to 'omin!o 4onasterio, should be considered as ha#in! terminated

) rule that is uniforml$ laid do n b$ the courts is, that the ill of the testator is the primar$ and principal la !o#ernin! ills and testaments, and hen the testamentar$ pro#isions are clearl$and positi#el$ stated, questions arisin! in the courts in connection ith the execution of andcompliance there ith shall be adjusted in harmon$ ith the plain and literal meanin! of thelan!ua!e of the testator, except here it clearl$ appears that his intention as other than thatactuall$ expressed 'ecisions of the supreme court of Spain of 4a$ 28, 1==2 October 13, 1=96October =, 1902 crala

/he abo#e le!al doctrine alread$ constitutes a uniform settled rule and is in accord ith theconclusi#e pro#ision of article 6>: of the -i#il -ode hich reads" chanrobles #irtuala librar$

%E#er$ testamentar$ pro#ision shall be understood in the literal meanin! of its ords, unless itclearl$ appears that the ill of the testator as different &n case of doubt, that hich appears

most in accordance ith the intention of the testator, accordin! to the tenor of the same ill,shall be obser#ed 5

Section 680 of the -ode of -i#il *rocedure pro#ides, amon! other thin!s, that after pa$ment ofthe debts and of the expenses of administration, the propert$ of the testator shall be disposed ofaccordin! to his ill and section 683 of said code hen enumeratin! the duties of an executorstates that one of them is to administer all propert$ comin! into his possession accordin! to theill of the testator

/he testator bequeathed to his ido the usufruct of t o parcels of land for the period of four$ears, in order that she mi!ht meet the debts of her husband -onsequentl$, the circumstance thatoutstandin! debts of the said estate ere declared to be barred, o in! to the failure of the #arious

creditors and especiall$ of the one named in the ill, to appear ithin the time specified b$ thecommissioners, is no #alid reason for shortenin! the period fixed in the ill ithin hich theusufruct should accrue to the ido and executrix /he barrin! of the debts of the estate cannoteffect a modification of the ill, nor cause the testamentar$ pro#ision of the testator to beinterpreted as meanin! an$thin! but that stated in his ill

-learl$ and precisel$ the testator pro#ided as his last ill that his said ife should administer thesaid parcels of land for four $ears, in order that she mi!ht pa$ his debts /he fact that no creditore#er appeared to collect them is no reason h$ the ido and executrix should be depri#ed ofthe usufruct of said properties before the lapse of the said four $ears Such depri#ation ould bein #iolation of the special la that !o#erns the matter, that is, the ill of the testator, b$ hichhis propert$ must be administered, accordin! to the le!al pro#isions and settled ruleshereinbefore cited/he #alidit$ and efficienc$ of the usufruct bequeathed to the ido and executrix of the testatoris not incompatible ith the pro#isions of section 69: of the -ode of -i#il *rocedure, becauseapart from the obli!ation imposed b$ the testator upon his ife in the matte of the pa$ment of hisdebts, hich obli!ation she as unable to fulfill inasmuch as no creditor presented himself, thereexists the order or request that she should retain the said lands in her possession for four $ears,

8/13/2019 Postigo vs. Borjal

3/3

3

and there is no #alid reason h$ the ill of the testator should not be complied ith and the land be deli#ered to 'olores Borjal at the expiration of said four $ears

/herefore, in #ie of the fore!oin!, it is our opinion that the jud!ment appealed from should bere#ersed, and that it be held, as e do hereb$ hold, that )mbrosia *osti!o is entitled to

possession and to administer for the period of four $ears, from the death of the testator, the t o parcels of land and that 'olores Borjal cannot ta;e possession thereof until after the lease of thesaid term 7o special rulin! is made as to the costs in either instance

Ar%&&a'o,C.J., Ma(a, #oh'so' a') $arso', JJ., co'c*r.

S%(ara+% O( ' o's

WILLARD, J., concurring: chanrobles virtualawlibrar

& concur in the result on the !round that this case falls ithin the pro#isions of article >9> of the

-i#il -ode, and of the decisions entered in the matters of -hion!