G.R. No. L-5772, January 23, 1912
JOSEFA FULGENCIO, plaintiff-appellee, vs. BENITA GATCHALIAN, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Josefa Fulgencio, the administratrix of the intestate estate of Dionisio Fulgencio, filed a complaint against Benita Gatchalian (the widow of Dionisio) and others. She sought to take possession of properties allegedly belonging to the conjugal partnership of Dionisio and Benita, to be included in the estate inventory. Josefa claimed that Dionisio brought 2,500 pesos into the marriage, and that the listed properties (including a house, warehouse, bakery, bazaar, cockpit share, carabaos, furniture, and market shops) were conjugal assets. Benita Gatchalian resisted, asserting that most properties were acquired using her own paraphernal funds (9,000 pesos in cash and 3,000 pesos in goods brought into the marriage) and that Dionisio had only contributed 100 pesos. The trial court ruled in favor of the administratrix, ordering the properties to be delivered for inventory. The defendants appealed.

ISSUE

Whether the properties in dispute are conjugal partnership property (and thus part of the estate inventory) or the exclusive paraphernal property of the widow Benita Gatchalian.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the trial court’s judgment, holding that the properties are presumed conjugal and must be inventoried as part of the estate. The Court applied Article 1407 of the Civil Code, which provides that all property of the marriage is presumed conjugal unless proven to belong exclusively to either spouse. The parties had stipulated that the disputed properties were acquired during the marriage and were registered in the name of the deceased Dionisio Fulgencio. Since Benita Gatchalian failed to conclusively prove that the properties were her exclusive paraphernal assets, the presumption of conjugality prevails. The properties are therefore liable for the debts of the conjugal partnership and must be included in the estate inventory. The widow’s rights to claim any paraphernal property are reserved for determination after the inventory is completed. The Court modified the judgment only with respect to defendant Gabriela Lopez, who was not proven to hold estate property.