G.R. No. L‑2803
December 7, 1906

—

FACTS
– Juan Banatin died on 23 April 1897 leaving a widow (plaintiff‑appellee, Damasa Alcala) and 17 nephews/nieces as heirs.
– On 13 June 1897 the widow and the heirs executed a written partition of the decedent’s estate.
– The partition stipulated that the house in Calamba, La Lagunа would remain undivided and that nephew Francisco Salgado (defendant‑appellant) would administer it, collect its rents, and distribute one‑half of the rents to the widow and the other half to the other heirs.
– Salgado accepted the administration and collected rents, but paid the entire amount to the nephews/nieces, withholding the widow’s share.
– The defendant contended the partition was void because not all heirs signed: Juan Banaybanay was a prisoner at the time of signing, and Tranquilino Banatin refused to sign. A supplemental document transferred Tranquilino’s share to another heir and was also signed by Salgado.

ISSUE
Whether the defect in the partition agreementspecifically, the lack of signatures of two heirsrelieves the administrator (Francisco Salgado) from his contractual duty to remit one‑half of the rents to the surviving spouse, Damasa Alcala.

RULING
– The Court held that the failure of two heirs to sign does not discharge Salgado from the obligation he voluntarily assumed under the partition.
– Salgado took possession knowing the partition was imperfect; by accepting administration, he bound himself to its terms, including the rent‑sharing provision.
– Even absent any partition, Article 837 of the Civil Code grants the surviving spouse a one‑half usufruct of the estate when there are no legitimate ascendants or descendants.
– Consequently, Salgado is legally required to pay the widow one‑half of the rents.
– The judgment of the lower court ordering the defendant to pay the withheld rents is AFFIRMED, with costs against the appellant.

—