GR L 14530; (April, 1962) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-14530; April 25, 1962
LEONA AGLIBOT, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. ANDREA ACAY MAÑALAC, ET AL., defendants-appellants.
FACTS
The plaintiffs-appellees, Leona and Evarista Aglibot, filed an action to recover ownership and possession of a parcel of land from the defendants-appellants, Andrea Acay Mañalac and her children. The Aglibots claimed they inherited the land from their deceased niece, Juliana Mañalac, the only child of Anacleto Mañalac and his first wife, Maria Aglibot (the appellees’ sister). The appellants, Anacleto’s second wife and their children, had taken possession of the property upon Anacleto’s death, claiming it as part of his estate. The land was originally conjugal property of Anacleto and Maria Aglibot and was titled in Anacleto’s name “married to Maria Aglibot.” Maria died in 1906, and their daughter Juliana inherited her mother’s half. When Juliana died intestate and without descendants in 1920, her father Anacleto inherited her share.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the property inherited by Anacleto Mañalac from his daughter Juliana is subject to a legal reserve in favor of the appellees, or whether it passed entirely to Anacleto’s second family upon his death.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment, with modification regarding liability for fruits. The Court ruled that the property is reservable property under Article 811 of the Spanish Civil Code (Article 891 of the New Civil Code). When Anacleto inherited from his daughter Juliana, who died without descendants, he was obligated to reserve that inherited portion for the benefit of relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which the property came. The appellees, as sisters of Maria Aglibot (the mother from whose side the property originated), are such relatives. Therefore, upon Anacleto’s death, the reserved portion should pass to the appellees, not to his second family. The Court rejected the appellants’ claim that the land was paid for after Maria’s death, noting the title indicated acquisition during the first marriage. On the secondary issue, the Court modified the damages award, holding that only the surviving second spouse, Andrea Acay, who had possession and received the fruits, should be liable to deliver 15 cavans of palay yearly (half the produce) from the filing of the complaint. The claim for tax reimbursement was dismissed for being raised only on appeal.