Case Digest: Dizon-Rivera vs. Dizon, G.R. No. L-24561, June 30, 1970

  Art. 1061, 1062 | Succession, Partition

Provisions:

Article 788. If a testamentary disposition admits of different interpretations, in case of doubt, that interpretation by which the disposition is to be operative shall be preferred. 

Article 791. The words of a will are to receive an interpretation which will give to every expression some effect, rather than one which will render any of the expressions inoperative; and of two modes of interpreting a will, that is to be preferred which will prevent intestacy.

Article 842. One who has no compulsory heirs may dispose by will of all his estate or any part of it in favor of any person having capacity to succeed.

One who has compulsory heirs may dispose of his estate provided he does not contravene the provisions of this Code with regard to the legitime of said heirs.

Article 846. Heirs instituted without designation of shares shall inherit in equal parts.

Article 847. When the testator institutes some heirs individually and others collectively as when he says, "I designate as my heirs A and B, and the children of C," those collectively designated shall be considered as individually instituted, unless it clearly appears that the intention of the testator was otherwise.

Article 848. If the testator should institute his brothers and sisters, and he has some of full blood and others of half blood, the inheritance shall be distributed equally unless a different intention appears.

Article 906. Any compulsory heir to whom the testator has left by any title less than the legitime belonging to him may demand that the same be fully satisfied.

Article 907. Testamentary dispositions that impair or diminish the legitime of the compulsory heirs shall be reduced on petition of the same, insofar as they may be inofficious or excessive.

Article 912. If the devise subject to reduction should consist of real property, which cannot be conveniently divided, it shall go to the devisee if the reduction does not absorb one-half of its value; and in a contrary case, to the compulsory heirs; but the former and the latter shall reimburse each other in cash for what respectively belongs to them.

The devisee who is entitled to a legitime may retain the entire property, provided its value does not exceed that of the disposable portion and of the share pertaining to him as legitime. 

Article 1080. Should a person make partition of his estate by an act inter vivos, or by will, such partition shall be respected, insofar as it does not prejudice the legitime of the compulsory heirs.

A parent who, in the interest of his or her family, desires to keep any agricultural, industrial, or manufacturing enterprise intact, may avail himself of the right granted him in this article, by ordering that the legitime of the other children to whom the property is not assigned, be paid in cash.

Article 1091. A partition legally made confers upon each heir the exclusive ownership of the property adjudicated to him. 

Ponente:

Teehankee, J.

Petitioner:  Marina Dizon-Rivera

Respondents: Estela Dizon, Tomas V. Dizon, 

                    Bernardita Dizon, Josefina Dizon, 

                    Angelina Dizon and Lilia Dizon

Facts:

On February 2, 1960, Agripina J. Valdez, a widow, made a will dividing her estate among her heirs and seven grandchildren. 

On January 28, 1961, she passed away.

She was survived by seven compulsory heirs: six legitimate children and one legitimate granddaughter.

The will was admitted to probate, and appellee Marina Dizon-Rivera was appointed as the executrix. 

After the inventory and appraisal of the estate, the real and personal properties of the testatrix at the time of her death had a total appraised value of P 1,811,695.60 and each compulsory heir's legitime amounted to P129,362.11. (1/7 of the half of the estate reserved for the legitime of legitimate children and descendants)

The will specified the distribution of specific real properties among the heirs.

Five of the heirs felt they received less than their legitime, while Marina and Tomas received more.

1. Estela Dizon ....................................... P 98,474.80

2. Angelina Dizon .................................... 106,307.06

3. Bernardita Dizon ................................... 51,968.17

4. Josefina Dizon ...................................... 52,056.39

5. Tomas Dizon ....................................... 131,987.41

6. Lilia Dizon ............................................. 72,182.47

7. Marina Dizon .................................... 1,148,063.71

8. Pablo Rivera, Jr. .................................... 69,280.00

9. Lilia Dizon, Gilbert Garcia,

Cayetano Dizon, Francisco Rivera,

Agripina Ayson, Dioli or Jolly

Jimenez, Laureano Tiamzon ................. 72,540.00

Total Value ...................... P1,801,960.01

Marina Dizon-Rivera filed a project of partition to ensure the legitimes of all heirs were satisfied.  She proposed:

• Completing the legitimes of other compulsory heirs to P129,254.96 by giving them properties mentioned in the will plus cash or properties.
• Marina and Tomas were to receive properties mentioned in the will, minus cash or properties needed to complete their legitime.
• Grandchildren's shares in the will were not changed.

Oppositors suggested a counter-project of partition:

• Reducing testamentary dispositions to half the estate, totaling P905,534.78.
• The other half of the estate would be deemed as the legitime.

Lower Court: Approved Marina's project of partition.

The court ruled that the testatrix's will constituted a valid partition of her estate and should be respected unless it prejudiced the legitime of the compulsory heirs.

Issue:

WoN the lower court erred in approving the executrix’ project of partition. NO

Held:

The issues raised present a matter of determining the avowed intention of the testatrix which is "the life and soul of a will." 

The testator's wishes and intention constitute the first and principal law in the matter of testaments, when expressed clearly and precisely in his last will amount to the only law whose mandate must imperatively be faithfully obeyed and complied with by his executors, heirs and devisees and legatees, and neither these interested parties nor the courts may substitute their own criterion for the testator's will. 

In the third paragraph of her will, after commanding that upon her death all her obligations as well as the expenses of her last illness and funeral and the expenses for probate of her last will and for the administration of her property in accordance with law, be paid, she expressly provided that "it is my wish and I command that my property be divided" in accordance with the dispositions immediately thereafter following, whereby she specified each real property in her estate and designated the particular heir among her seven compulsory heirs and seven other grandchildren to whom she bequeathed the same. This was a valid partition of her estate. 

This right of a testator to partition his estate is subject only to the right of compulsory heirs to their legitime. This was properly complied with in the executrix-appellee's project of partition, wherein the five oppositors-appellants namely Estela, Bernardita, Angelina, Josefina and Lilia, were adjudicated the properties respectively distributed and assigned to them by the testatrix in her will, and the differential to complete their respective legitimes of P129,362.11 each were taken from the cash and/or properties of the executrix-appellee, Marina, and their co-oppositor-appellant, Tomas, who admittedly were favored by the testatrix and received in the partition by will more than their respective legitimes.

Oppositors' proposal would amount substantially to a distribution by intestacy and pro tanto nullify the testatrix' will. The testamentary dispositions of the testatrix, being dispositions in favor of compulsory heirs, do not have to be taken only from the free portion of the estate.

The dispositions by the testatrix constituted a partition by will, and upholding the primacy of the testator's last will and testament, have to be respected insofar as they do not prejudice the legitime of the other compulsory heirs. Neither may the appellants legally insist on their legitime being completed with real properties of the estate instead of being paid in cash, per the approved project of partition. The properties are not available for the purpose, as the testatrix had specifically partitioned and distributed them to her heirs, and the heirs are called upon, as far as feasible to comply with and give effect to the intention of the testatrix as solemnized in her will, by implementing her manifest wish of transmitting the real properties intact to her named beneficiaries, principally the executrix-appellee.