#

11

MARINA DIZON-RIVERA, executrix-appellee, vs. ESTELA DIZON,

TOMAS V. DIZON, BERNARDITA DIZON, JOSEFINA DIZON,
Testate proceedings were in due course commenced 2 and by order
ANGELINA DIZON and LILIA DIZON, oppositors-
dated March 13, 1961, the last will and testament of the decedent
was duly allowed and admitted to probate, and the appellee Marina
Dizon-Rivera was appointed executrix of the testatrix' estate, and
Appeal from orders of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga
upon her filing her bond and oath of office, letters testamentary
approving the Executrix-appellee's project of partition instead of
were duly issued to her. 
Oppositors-Appellants' proposed counter-project of partition. 1 

After the executrix filed her inventory of the estate, Dr. Adelaido
On January 28, 1961, the testatrix, Agripina J. Valdez. a widow, died
Bernardo of Angeles, Pampanga was appointed commissioner to
in Angeles, Pampanga, and was survived by seven compulsory heirs,
appraise the properties of the estate. He filed in due course his
to wit, six legitimate children named Estela Dizon, Tomas V. Dizon,
report of appraisal, and the same was approved in toto by the lower
Bernardita Dizon, Marina Dizon (herein executrix-appellee),
court on December 12, 1963 upon joint petition of the parties. 
Angelina Dizon and Josefina Dizon, and a legitimate grand-daughter
named Lilia Dizon, who is the only legitimate child and heir of
Ramon Dizon, a pre-deceased legitimate son of the said decedent.
The real and personal properties of the testatrix at the time of her
Six of these seven compulsory heirs (except Marina Dizon, the
death thus had a total appraised value of P1,811,695.60, and the
executrix-appellee) are the oppositors-appellants. 
legitime of each of the seven compulsory heirs amounted to
P129,362.11. 3 (1/7 of the half of the estate reserved for the
legitime of legitimate children and descendants). 4 In her will, the
The deceased testatrix left a last will executed on February 2, I960
testatrix "commanded that her property be divided" in accordance
and written in the Pampango dialect. Named beneficiaries in her will
with her testamentary disposition, whereby she devised and
were the above-named compulsory heirs, together with seven other
bequeathed specific real properties comprising practically the entire
legitimate grandchildren, namely Pablo Rivera, Jr., Gilbert D. Garcia,
bulk of her estate among her six children and eight grandchildren.
Cayetano Dizon, Francisco Rivera, Agripina Ayson, Jolly Jimenez and
The appraised values of the real properties thus respectively devised
Laureano Tiambon. 
by the testatrix to the beneficiaries named in her will, are as
follows: 
In her will, the testatrix divided, distributed and disposed of all her
properties appraised at P1,801,960.00 (except, two small parcels of
1. Estela Dizon P 98,474.80 
land appraised at P5,849.60, household furniture valued at
P2,500.00, a bank deposit in the sum of P409.95 and ten shares of
Pampanga Sugar Development Company valued at P350.00) among
2. Angelina Dizon 106,307.06 
her abovenamed heirs. 

468430880.docx Page 1 of 8
 #
11

(executrix-appellee) and Tomas (appellant) are admittedly

considered to have received in the will more than their respective
3. Bernardita Dizon 51,968.17 
legitime, while the rest of the appellants, namely, Estela, Bernardita,
Angelina, Josefina and Lilia received less than their respective
4. Josefina Dizon 52,056.39  legitime: 

5. Tomas Dizon 131,987.41  (2) thus, to each of the latter are adjudicated the properties
respectively given them in the will, plus cash and/or properties, to
complete their respective legitimes to P129,254.96; 
6. Lilia Dizon 72,182.47 

(3) on the other hand, Marina and Tomas are adjudicated the
7. Marina Dizon 1,148,063.71  properties that they received in the will less the cash and/or
properties necessary to complete the prejudiced legitime
mentioned in number 2 above; 
8. Pablo Rivera, Jr. 69,280.00 

(4) the adjudications made in the will in favor of the grandchildren

9. Lilia Dizon, Gilbert Garcia, Cayetano  remain untouched." 
Dizon, Francisco Rivera, Agripina 
Ayson, Dioli or Jolly Jimenez,  On the other hand oppositors submitted their own counter-project
of partition dated February 14, 1964, wherein they proposed the
Laureano Tiamzon 72,540.00 
distribution of the estate on the following basis: 

Total Value 1,801,960.01" 

"(a) all the testamentary dispositions were proportionally reduced
to the value of one-half (1/2) of the entire estate, the value of the
said one-half (1/2) amounting to P905,534.78; (b) the shares of the
The executrix filed her project of partition dated February 5, 1964,
Oppositors-Appellants should consist of their legitime, plus the
in substance adjudicating the estate as follows: 
devises in their favor proportionally reduced; (c) in payment of the
total shares of the appellants in the entire estate, the properties
"(1) with the figure of P129,254.96 as legitime for a basis Marina devised to them plus other properties left by the Testatrix and/or
cash are adjudicated to them; and (d) to the grandchildren who are

468430880.docx Page 2 of 8
 #
11

not compulsory heirs are adjudicated the properties respectively

devised to them subject to reimbursement by Gilbert D. Garcia et
9. Grandchildren Gilbert Garcia et al 36,452.80 
al., of the sums by which the devise in their favor should be
proportionally reduced." 
Total P905,534.78" 
Under the oppositors' counter-project of partition, the testamentary ========== 
disposition made by the testatrix of practically her whole estate of
P1,801,960.01, as above stated, were proposed to be reduced to
the amounts set forth after the names of the respective heirs and while the other half of the estate (P905,534.78) would he deemed
devisees totalling one-half thereof as follows:  as constituting the legitime of the executrix-appellee and
oppositors-appellants, to be divided among them in seven equal
parts of P129,362.11 as their respective legitimes. 
"1. Estela Dizon P 49,485.56 

The lower court, after hearing, sustained and approved the

2. Angelina Dizon 53,421.42  executrix' project of partition, ruling that "(A)rticles 906 and 907 of
the New Civil Code specifically provide that when the legitime is
impaired or prejudiced, the same shall be completed and satisfied.
3. Bernardita Dizon 26,115.04  While it is true that this process has been followed and adhered to
in the two projects of partition, it is observed that the executrix and
the oppositors differ in respect to the source from which the portion
4. Josefina Dizon 26,159.38  or portions shall be taken in order to fully restore the impaired
legitime. The proposition of the oppositors, if upheld, will
substantially result in a distribution of intestacy, which is in
5. Tomas V. Dizon 65,874.04  controversion of Article 791 of the New Civil Code" adding that "the
testatrix has chosen to favor certain heirs in her will for reasons of
her own, cannot be doubted. This is legally permissible within the
6. Lilia Dizon 36,273.13  limitation of the law, as aforecited." With reference to the payment
in cash of some P230,552.38, principally by the executrix as the
largest beneficiary of the will to be paid to her five co-heirs, the
7. Marina Dizon 576,938.82 
oppositors (excluding Tomas Dizon), to complete their-impaired
legitimes, the lower court ruled that "(T)he payment in cash so as to
make the proper adjustment to meet with the requirements of the
8. Pablo Rivera, Jr. 34,814.50 
law in respect to legitimes which have been impaired is, in our

468430880.docx Page 3 of 8
 #
11

opinion, a practical and valid solution in order to give effect to the rather than one which will render any of .the expressions
last wishes of the testatrix."  inoperative; and of two modes of interpreting a will, that is to be
preferred which will prevent intestacy." In Villanueva vs. Juico 6 for
violation of these rules of interpretation as well as of Rule 123,
From the lower court's orders of approval, oppositors-appellants section 59 of the old Rules of Court, 7 the Court, speaking through
have filed this appeal, and raise anew the following issues:  Mr. Justice J.B.L. Reyes, overturned the lower court's decision and
stressed that "the intention and wishes of the testator, when clearly
expressed in his will, constitute the fixed law of interpretation, and
1. Whether or not the testamentary dispositions made in the all questions raised at the trial, relative to its execution and
testatrix' will are in the nature of devises imputable to the free fulfillment, must be settled in accordance therewith, following the
portion of her estate, and therefore subject to reduction;  plain and literal meaning of the testator's words, unless it clearly
appears that his intention was otherwise." 8 

2. Whether the appellants are entitled to the devise plus their

legitime under Article 1063, or merely to demand completion of The testator's wishes and intention constitute the first and principal
their legitime under Article 906 of the Civil Code; and  law in the matter of testaments, and to paraphrase an early decision
of the Supreme Court of Spain. 9 when expressed clearly and
precisely in his last will amount to the only law whose mandate
3. Whether the appellants may be compelled to accept payment in must imperatively be faithfully obeyed and complied with by his
cash on account of their legitime, instead of some of the real executors, heirs and devisees and legatees, and neither these
properties left by the Testatrix;  interested parties nor the courts may substitute their own criterion
for the testator's will. Guided and restricted by these fundamental
premises, the Court finds for the appellee. 
which were adversely decided against them in the proceedings
below. 
1. Decisive of the issues at bar is the fact that the testatrix'
testamentary disposition was in the nature of a partition of her
The issues raised present a matter of determining the avowed
estate by will. Thus, in the third paragraph of her will after
intention of the testatrix which is "the life and soul of a will." 5 In
commanding that upon her death all her obligations as well as the
consonance therewith, our Civil Code included the new provisions
expenses of her last illness and funeral and the expenses for
found in Articles 788 and 791 thereof that "(I)f a testamentary
probate of her last will and for the administration of her property in
disposition admits of different interpretations, in case of doubt, that
accordance with law, be paid, she expressly provided that "it is my
interpretation by which the disposition is to be operative shall be
wish and I command that my property be divided" in accordance
preferred" and "(T)he words of a will are to receive an
with the dispositions immediately thereafter following, whereby she
interpretation which will give to every expression some effect,
specified each real property in her estate and designated the

468430880.docx Page 4 of 8
 #
11

particular heir among her seven compulsory heirs and seven other recognized even in Article 1056 of the old Civil Code which has been
grandchildren to whom she bequeathed the same. This was a valid reproduced now as Article 1080 of the present Civil Code. The only
partition 10 of her estate, as contemplated and authorized in the amendment in the provision was that Article 1080 "now permits any
first paragraph of Article 1080 of the Civil Code, providing that person (not a testator, as under the old law) to partition his estate
"(S)hould a person make a partition of his estate by an act inter by act inter vivos." 11 This was intended to repeal the then
vivos or by will, such partition shall be respected, insofar as it does prevailing doctrine 12 that for a testator to partition his estate by an
not prejudice the legitime of the compulsory heirs." This right of a act inter vivos, he must first make a will with all the formalities
testator to partition his estate is subject only to the right of provided by law. Authoritative commentators doubt the efficacy of
compulsory heirs to their legitime. The Civil Code thus provides the the amendment 13 but the question does not here concern us, for
safeguard for the right of such compulsory heirs:  this is a clear case of partition by will, duly admitted to probate,
which perforce must be given full validity and effect. Aside from the
provisions of Articles 906 and 907 above quoted, other codal
"ART. 906. Any compulsory heir to whom the testator has left by provisions support the executrix-appellee's project of partition as
any title less than the legitime belonging to him may demand that approved by the lower court rather than the counter-project of
the same be fully satisfied.  partition proposed by oppositors-appellants whereby they would
reduce the testamentary disposition or partition made by the
testatrix to one-half and limit the same, which they would consider
"ART. 907. Testamentary dispositions that impair or diminish the as mere devises or legacies, to one-half of the estate as the
legitime of the compulsory heirs shall be reduced on petition of the disposable free portion, and apply the other half of the estate to
same, insofar as they may be inofficious or excessive.  payment of the legitimes of the seven compulsory heirs. Oppositors'
proposal would amount substantially to a distribution by intestacy
and pro tanto nullify the testatrix' will, contrary to Article 791 of the
This was properly complied with in the executrix-appellee's project Civil Code. It would further run counter to the provisions of Article
of partition, wherein the five oppositors-appellants namely Estela. 1091 of the Civil Code that "(A) partition legally made confers upon
Bernardita, Angelina, Josefina and Lilia, were adjudicated the each heir the exclusive ownership of the property adjudicated to
properties respectively distributed and assigned to them by the him. 
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- "3. In Habana vs. Imbo, 14 the Court upheld the distribution made in
oppositor-appellant, Tomas, who admittedly were favored by the the will of the deceased testator Pedro Teves of two large coconut
testatrix and received in the partition by will more than their plantations in favor of his daughter, Concepcion, as against adverse
respective legitimes.  claims of other compulsory heirs, as being a partition by will, which
should be respected insofar as it does not prejudice the legitime of
the compulsory heirs, in accordance with Article 1080 of the Civil
2. This right of a testator to partition his estate by will was

468430880.docx Page 5 of 8
 #
11

Code. In upholding the sale made by Concepcion to a stranger of the whole estate (save for some small properties of little value already
plantations thus partitioned in her favor in the deceased's will which noted at the beginning of this opinion) that her clear intention was
was being questioned by the other compulsory heirs, the Court to partition her whole estate through her will. The repeated use of
ruled that "Concepcion Teves by operation of law, became the the words "I bequeath" in her testamentary dispositions acquire no
absolute owner of said lots because 'A partition legally made legal significance, such as to convert the same into devises to be
confers upon each heir the exclusive ownership of the property taken solely from the free one-half disposable portion of the estate.
adjudicated to him' (Article 1091, New Civil Code), from the death of Furthermore, the testatrix' intent that her testamentary dispositions
her ancestors, subject to rights and obligations of the latter, and, were by way of adjudications to the beneficiaries as heirs and not as
she can not be deprived of her rights thereto except by the methods mere devisees, and that said dispositions were therefore on account
provided for by law (Arts. 657, 659, and 661, Civil Code). 15 of the respective legitimes of the compulsory heirs is expressly
Concepcion Teves could, as she did, sell the lots in question as part borne out in the fourth paragraph of her will, immediately following
of her share of the proposed partition of the properties, especially her testamentary adjudications in the third paragraph in this wise:
when, as in the present case, the sale has been expressly recognized "FOURTH: I likewise command that in case any of those I named as
by herself and her co-heirs . . .  my heirs in this testament any of them shall die before I do, his
forced heirs under the law enforced at the time of my death shall
inherit the properties I bequeath to said deceased." 17 
4. The burden of oppositors' contention is that the testamentary
dispositions in their favor are in the nature of devises of real
property, citing the testatrix' repeated use of the words "I Oppositors' conclusions necessarily are in error. The testamentary
bequeath" in her assignment or distribution of her real properties to dispositions of the testatrix, being dispositions in favor of
the respective heirs. From this erroneous premise, they proceed to compulsory heirs, do not have to be taken only from the free
the equally erroneous conclusion that "the legitime of the portion of the estate, as contended, for the second paragraph of
compulsory heirs passes to them by operation of law and that the Article 842 of the Civil Code precisely provides that "(O)ne who has
testator can only dispose of the free portion, that is, the remainder compulsory heirs may dispose of his estate provided he does not
of the estate after deducting the legitime of the compulsory contravene the provisions of this Code with regard to the legitime of
heirs . . . and all testamentary dispositions, either in the nature of said heirs." And even going by oppositors' own theory of bequests,
institution of heirs or of devises or legacies, have to be taken from the second paragraph of Article 912 of the Civil Code covers
the remainder of the testator's estate constituting the free portion." precisely the case of the executrix-appellee, who admittedly was
16  favored by the testatrix with the large bulk of her estate in providing
that "(T)he devisee who is entitled to a legitime may retain the
entire property, provided its value does not exceed that of the
Oppositors err in their premises, for the adjudications and disposable portion and of the share pertaining to him as legitime."
assignments in the testatrix' will of specific properties to specific For "diversity of apportionment is the usual reason for making a
heirs cannot be considered all devises, for it clearly appear from the testament; otherwise, the decedent might as well die intestate." 18
whole context of the will and the disposition by the testatrix of her

468430880.docx Page 6 of 8
 #
11

Fundamentally, of course, the dispositions by the testatrix Neither may the appellants legally insist on their legitime being
constituted a partition by will, which by mandate of Article 1080 of completed with real properties of the estate instead of being paid in
the Civil Code and of the other cited codal provisions upholding the cash, per the approved project of partition. The properties are not
primacy of the testator's last will and testament, have to be available for the purpose, as the testatrix had specifically
respected insofar as they do not prejudice the legitime of the other partitioned and distributed them to her heirs, and the heirs are
compulsory heirs.  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
Oppositors' invoking of Article 1063 of the Civil Code that named beneficiaries, principally the executrix-appellee. The
"(P)roperty left by will is not deemed subject to collation, if the appraisal report of the properties of the estate as filed by the
testator has not otherwise provided, but the legitime shall in any commissioner appointed by the lower court was approved in toto
case remain unimpaired" and invoking of the construction thereof upon joint petition of the parties, and hence, there cannot be said
given by some authorities that "'not deemed subject to collation' in to be any question and none is presented as to fairness of the
this article really means not imputable to or chargeable against the valuation thereof or that the legitime of the heirs in terms of cash
legitime", while it may have some plausibility 19 in an appropriate has been understated. The plaint of oppositors that the purchasing
case, has no application in the present ease. Here, we have a case of value of the Philippine peso has greatly declined since the testatrix'
a distribution and partition of the entire estate by the testatrix, death in January, 1961 provides no legal basis or justification for
without her having made any previous donations during her lifetime overturning the wishes and intent of the testatrix. The transmission
which would require collation to determine the legitime of each heir of rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of
nor having left merely some properties by will which would call for death of the decedent (Article 777, Civil Code) and accordingly, the
the application of Articles 1061 to 1063 of the Civil Code on value thereof must be reckoned as of then, as otherwise, estates
collation. The amount of the legitime of the heirs is here would never be settled if there were to be a revaluation with every
determined and undisputed.  subsequent fluctuation in the values of the currency and properties
of the estate. There is evidence in the record that prior to
November 25, 1964, one of the oppositors, Bernardita, accepted the
5. With this resolution of the decisive issue raised by oppositors- sum of P50,000.00 on account of her inheritance, which, per the
appellants, the secondary issues are likewise necessarily resolved. parties' manifestation, 20 "does not in any way affect the
Their right was merely to demand completion of their legitime adjudication made to her in the projects of partition of either party
under Article 906 of the Civil Code and this has been complied with as the same is a mere advance of the cash that she should receive in
in the approved project of partition, and they can no longer demand both projects of partition." The payment in cash by way of making
a further share from the remaining portion of the estate, as the proper adjustments in order to meet the requirements of the
bequeathed and partitioned by the testatrix principally to the law on non-impairment of legitimes as well as to give effect to the
executrix-appellee.  last will of the testatrix has invariably been availed of and
sanctioned. 21 That her co-oppositors would receive their cash

468430880.docx Page 7 of 8
 #
11

differentials only now when the value of the currency has declined
further, whereas they could have received them earlier, like
Bernardita, at the time of approval of the project of partition and
when the peso's purchasing value was higher, is due to their own
decision of pursuing the present appeal. 

ACCORDINGLY, the orders appealed from are hereby affirmed. 

468430880.docx Page 8 of 8