SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 200169. January 28, 2015.]

RODOLFO S. AGUILAR , petitioner, vs . EDNA G. SIASAT , respondent.

DECISION

DEL CASTILLO , J : p

This Petition for Review on Certiorari 1 seeks to set aside the August 30, 2006
Decision 2 and December 20, 2011 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R.
CEB-CV No. 64229 a rming the August 17, 1999 Decision 4 of the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Bacolod City, Branch 49 in Civil Case No. 96-9591 and denying petitioner's Motion
for Reconsideration. 5
Factual Antecedents
Spouses Alfredo Aguilar and Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar (the Aguilar spouses) died,
intestate and without debts, on August 26, 1983 and February 8, 1994, respectively.
Included in their estate are two parcels of land (herein subject properties) covered by
Transfer Certi cates of Title Nos. T-25896 and T-(15462) 1070 of the Registries of Deeds
of Bago and Bacolod (the subject titles). 6
In June 1996, petitioner Rodolfo S. Aguilar led with the RTC of Bacolod City
(Bacolod RTC) a civil case for mandatory injunction with damages against respondent
Edna G. Siasat. Docketed as Civil Case No. 96-9591 and assigned to Branch 49 of the
Bacolod RTC, the Complaint 7 alleged that petitioner is the only son and sole surviving heir
of the Aguilar spouses; that he (petitioner) discovered that the subject titles were missing,
and thus he suspected that someone from the Siasat clan could have stolen the same; that
he executed a davits of loss of the subject titles and led the same with the Registries of
Deeds of Bacolod and Bago; that on June 22, 1996, he led before the Bacolod RTC a
Petition for the issuance of second owner's copy of Certi cate of Title No. T-25896, which
respondent opposed; and that during the hearing of the said Petition, respondent
presented the two missing owner's duplicate copies of the subject titles. Petitioner thus
prayed for mandatory injunctive relief, in that respondent be ordered to surrender to him
the owner's duplicate copies of the subject titles in her possession; and that damages,
attorney's fees, and costs of suit be awarded to him.
In her Answer, 8 respondent claimed that petitioner is not the son and sole surviving
heir of the Aguilar spouses, but a mere stranger who was raised by the Aguilar spouses
out of generosity and kindness of heart; that petitioner is not a natural or adopted child of
the Aguilar spouses; that since Alfredo Aguilar predeceased his wife, Candelaria Siasat-
Aguilar, the latter inherited the conjugal share of the former; that upon the death of
Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar, her brothers and sisters inherited her estate as she had no issue;
and that the subject titles were not stolen, but entrusted to her for safekeeping by
Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar, who is her aunt. By way of counterclaim, respondent prayed for
an award of moral and exemplary damages, and attorney's fees.
During trial, petitioner testi ed and a rmed his relationship to the Aguilar spouses
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 as their son. To prove filiation, he presented the following documents, among others:
1. His school records at the Don J.A. Araneta Elementary School, Purok No. 2,
Bacolod-Murcia Milling Company (BMMC), Bacolod City (Exhibit "C" and
submarkings), wherein it is stated that Alfredo Aguilar is petitioner's parent;
2. His Individual Income Tax Return (Exhibit "F"), which indicated that Candelaria
Siasat-Aguilar is his mother;

3. Alfredo Aguilar's Social Security System (SSS) Form E-1 dated October 10,
1957 (Exhibit "G"), a public instrument subscribed and made under oath by
Alfredo Aguilar during his employment with BMMC, which bears his
signature and thumb marks and indicates that petitioner, who was born on
March 5, 1945, is his son and dependent;

4. Alfredo Aguilar's Information Sheet of Employment with BMMC dated October

29, 1954 (Exhibit "L"), indicating that petitioner is his son;

5. Petitioner's Certi cate of Marriage to Luz Abendan (Exhibit "M"), where it is

declared that the Aguilar spouses are his parents; and

6. Letter of the BMMC Secretary (Exhibit "O") addressed to a BMMC supervisor

introducing petitioner as Alfredo Aguilar's son and recommending him for
employment.
7. Certi cation dated January 27, 1996 issued by the Bacolod City Civil Registry
to the effect that the record of births during the period 1945 to 1946 were
"all destroyed by nature," hence no true copies of the Certi cate of Live
Birth of petitioner could be issued as requested (Exhibit "Q"). 9
aECTcA

Petitioner also offered the testimonies of his wife, Luz Marie Abendan-Aguilar
(Abendan-Aguilar), and Ester Aguilar-Pailano (Aguilar-Pailano), his aunt and sister of
Alfredo Aguilar. Abendan-Aguilar con rmed petitioner's identity, and she testi ed that
petitioner is the son of the Aguilar spouses and that during her marriage to petitioner, she
lived with the latter in the Aguilar spouses' conjugal home built on one of the subject
properties. On the other hand, 81-year old Aguilar-Pailano testi ed that she is the sister of
Alfredo Aguilar; that the Aguilar spouses have only one son — herein petitioner — who was
born at BMMC; that after the death of the Aguilar spouses, she and her siblings did not
claim ownership of the subject properties because they recognized petitioner as the
Aguilar spouses' sole child and heir; that petitioner was charged with murder, convicted,
imprisoned, and later on paroled; and that after he was discharged on parole, petitioner
continued to live with his mother Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar in one of the subject properties,
and continues to live there with his family. 10
For her evidence, respondent testi ed among others that she is a retired teacher;
that she does not know petitioner very well, but only heard his name from her aunt
Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar; that she is not related by consanguinity or a nity to petitioner;
that she attended to Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar while the latter was under medication in a
hospital until her death; that Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar's hospital and funeral expenses
were paid for by Nancy Vingno; that Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar executed an a davit to the
effect that she had no issue and that she is the sole heir to her husband Alfredo Aguilar's
estate; that she did not steal the subject titles, but that the same were entrusted to her by
Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar; that a prior planned sale of the subject properties did not push
through because when petitioner's opinion thereto was solicited, he expressed
disagreement as to the agreed price. 11
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Respondent likewise offered the testimony of Aurea Siasat-Nicavera (Siasat-
Nicavera), 74 years old, who stated that the Aguilar spouses were married on June 22,
1933 in Miag-ao, Iloilo; that she is the sister of Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar; that she does not
know petitioner, although she admitted that she knew a certain "Rodolfo" whose nickname
was "Mait"; that petitioner is not the son of the Aguilar spouses; and that Alfredo Aguilar
has a sister named Ester Aguilar-Pailano. 12
Respondent also offered an A davit previously executed by Candelaria Siasat-
Aguilar (Exhibit "2") announcing among others that she and Alfredo have no issue, and that
she is the sole heir to Alfredo's estate.
Ruling of the Regional Trial Court
On August 17, 1999, the Bacolod RTC issued its Decision, decreeing as follows: cTESIa

From the evidence thus adduced before this Court, no solid evidence
attesting to the fact that plaintiff herein is either a biological son or a legally
adopted one was ever presented. Neither was a certi cate of live birth of plaintiff
ever introduced con rming his biological relationship as a son to the deceased
spouses Alfredo and Candelaria S. Aguilar. As a matter of fact, in the a davit of
Candelaria S. Aguilar (Exhibit 2) she expressly announced under oath that Alfredo
and she have no issue and that she is the sole heir to the estate of Alfredo is (sic)
concrete proof that plaintiff herein was never a son by consanguinity nor a legally
adopted one of the deceased spouses Alfredo and Candelaria Aguilar.

This being the case, Petitioner is not deemed vested with su cient interest
in this action to be considered quali ed or entitled to the issuance of the writ of
mandatory injunction and damages prayed for.

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered dismissing plaintiff's complaint

with cost.

The counterclaim of the defendant is likewise dismissed for lack of legal

basis.

SO ORDERED. 13

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

Petitioner led an appeal with the CA. 14 Docketed as CA-G.R. CEB-CV No. 64229,
the appeal essentially argued that petitioner is indeed the Aguilar spouses' son; that under
Article 172 of the Family Code, 15 an admission of legitimate liation in a public document
or a private handwritten instrument signed by the parent concerned constitutes proof of
liation; that through the documentary evidence presented, petitioner has shown that he is
the legitimate biological son of the Aguilar spouses and the sole heir to their estate. He
argued that he cannot present his Certi cate of Live Birth as all the records covering the
period 1945-1946 16 of the Local Civil Registry of Bacolod City were destroyed as shown
by Exhibits "Q" to "Q-3"; for this reason, he presented the foregoing documentary evidence
to prove his relationship to the Aguilar spouses. Petitioner made particular reference to,
among others, Alfredo Aguilar's SSS Form E-1 (Exhibit "G"), arguing that the same was
made under oath and thus su cient under Article 172 of the Family Code to establish that
he is a child and heir of the Aguilar spouses. Finally, petitioner questioned the trial court's
reliance upon Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar's a davit (Exhibit "2") attesting that she and
Alfredo have no children and that she is the sole heir to the estate of Alfredo, when such
piece of evidence has been discarded by the trial court in a previous Order dated April 1,
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 1998, stating thus: AcHEaS

Except for defendant's Exhibit "2", all other Exhibits, Exhibits "1", "3", "4" and
"5", together with their submarkings, are all admitted in evidence. 17

On August 30, 2006, the CA issued the assailed Decision a rming the trial court's
August 17, 1999 Decision, pronouncing thus:
The exhibits relied upon by plaintiff-appellant to establish his liation with
the deceased spouses Aguilar deserve scant consideration by this Court. The
Elementary School Permanent Record of plaintiff-appellant cannot be considered
as proof of liation. As enunciated by the Supreme Court in the case of Reyes vs.
Court of Appeals, 135 SCRA 439:
"Student record or other writing not signed by alleged father do not
constitute evidence of filiation."
As regards the Income Tax Return of plaintiff-appellant led with the
Bureau of Internal Revenue, WE hold that it cannot be considered as evidence of
liation. As stated by the Supreme Court in the case of Labagala vs. Santiago,
371 SCRA 360:
"A baptismal certi cate, a private document is not conclusive proof
of liation. More so are the entries made in an income tax return, which
only shows that income tax has been paid and the amount thereof."
With respect to the Certi cate of Marriage . . . wherein it is shown that the
parents of the former are Alfredo and Candelaria Siasat Aguilar does not prove
liation. The Highest Tribunal declared that a marriage contract not signed by the
alleged father of bride is not competent evidence of liation nor is a marriage
contract recognition in a public instrument.

The rest of the exhibits offered . . ., except the Social Security Form E-1
(Exhibit "G") and the Information Sheet of Employment of Alfredo Aguilar (Exhibit
"L"), allegedly tend to establish that plaintiff-appellant has been and is presently
known as Rodolfo Siasat Aguilar and he has been bearing the surname of his
alleged parents.

WE cannot sustain plaintiff-appellant's argument. Use of a family surname

certainly does not establish pedigree.

Insofar as the SSS Form E-1 and Information Sheet of Employment of

Alfredo Aguilar are concerned, WE cannot accept them as su cient proof to
establish and prove the liation of plaintiff-appellant to the deceased Aguilar
spouses. While the former is a public instrument and the latter bears the signature
of Alfredo Aguilar, they do not constitute clear and convincing evidence to show
liation based on open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate
child. Filiation is a serious matter that must be resolved according to the
requirements of the law.
All told, plaintiff-appellant's evidence failed to hurdle the "high standard of
proof" required for the success of an action to establish one's legitimate liation
when relying upon the provisions regarding open and continuous possession or
any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws.
Having resolved that plaintiff appellant is not an heir of the deceased
spouses Aguilar, thereby negating his right to demand the delivery of the subject
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 TCTs in his favor, this Court cannot grant the writ of mandatory injunction being
prayed for.
xxx xxx xxx

In the present case, plaintiff-appellant failed to show that he has a clear

and unmistakable right that has been violated. Neither had he shown permanent
and urgent necessity for the issuance of the writ.
With respect to the damages prayed for, WE sustain the trial court in
denying the same. Aside from the fact that plaintiff-appellant failed to show his
clear right over the subject parcels of land so that he has not sustained any
damage by reason of the withholding of the TCTs from him, there is no clear
testimony on the anguish or anxiety he allegedly suffered as a result thereof. Well
entrenched in law and jurisprudence is the principle that the grant of moral
damages is expressly allowed by law in instances where proofs of the mental
anguish, serious anxiety and moral shock were shown.

ACCORDINGLY, in line with the foregoing disquisition, the appeal is hereby

DENIED. The impugned Decision of the trial court is AFFIRMED IN TOTO.

SO ORDERED. 18

Petitioner led a Motion for Reconsideration, 19 but in a December 20, 2011

Resolution, the CA held its ground. Hence, the present Petition.
Issues
In an August 28, 2013 Resolution, 20 this Court resolved to give due course to the
Petition, which raises the following issues:
In issuing the assailed DECISION a rming in toto the Decision of RTC
Branch 49, Bacolod City, and the Resolution denying petitioner's Motion for
Reconsideration, the Honorable Court of Appeals committed reversible error [in]
not taking into consideration petitioner's Exhibit "G" (SSS E-1 acknowledged and
notarized before a notary public, executed by Alfredo Aguilar, recognizing the
petitioner as his son) as public document that satis es the requirement of Article
172 of the [Family] Code in the establishment of the legitimate liation of the
petitioner with his father, Alfredo Aguilar.
The herein [P]etition raises the issue of pure question of law with respect to
the application of Article 172 of the Family Code particularly [paragraph] 3 thereof
in conjunction with Section 19 and Section 23, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court
relating to public document which is substantial enough to merit consideration of
this Honorable Court as it will enrich jurisprudence and forestall future litigation.
21

Petitioner's Arguments
In his Petition and Reply 22 seeking to reverse and set aside the assailed CA
dispositions and praying that judgment be rendered ordering respondent to surrender the
owner's duplicates of Transfer Certi cates of Title Nos. T-25896 and T-(15462) 1070,
petitioner argues that Alfredo Aguilar's SSS Form E-1 (Exhibit "G") satis es the
requirement for proof of liation and relationship to the Aguilar spouses under Article 172
of the Family Code. Petitioner contends that said SSS Form E-1 is a declaration under oath
by his father, Alfredo Aguilar, of his status as the latter's son; this recognition should be
accorded more weight than the presumption of legitimacy, since Article 172 itself declares
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 that said evidence establishes legitimate liation without need of court action. He adds
that in contemplation of law, recognition in a public instrument such as the SSS Form E-1 is
the "highest form of recognition which partake (sic) of the nature of a complete act of
recognition bestowed upon" him as the son of the late Alfredo Aguilar; that respondent has
no personality to impugn his legitimacy and cannot collaterally attack his legitimacy; that
the action to impugn his legitimacy has already prescribed pursuant to Articles 170 and
171 of the Family Code; 23 and that having proved his liation, mandatory injunction should
issue, and an award of damages is in order.
Respondent's Arguments
In her Comment 24 and Memorandum, 25 respondent simply echoes the
pronouncements of the CA, adding that the Petition is a mere rehash of the CA appeal
which has been passed upon succinctly by the appellate court.
Our Ruling
The Court grants the Petition.
This Court, speaking in De Jesus v. Estate of Dizon, 26 has held that —

The liation of illegitimate children, like legitimate children, is established by (1)

the record of birth appearing in the civil register or a nal judgment; or (2) an
admission of legitimate liation in a public document or a private
handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned . In the
absence thereof, liation shall be proved by (1) the open and continuous
possession of the status of a legitimate child; or (2) any other means allowed by
the Rules of Court and special laws. The due recognition of an illegitimate
child in a record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record, or
in any authentic writing is, in itself, a consummated act of
acknowledgment of the child, and no further court action is required. In
fact, any authentic writing is treated not just a ground for compulsory
recognition; it is in itself a voluntary recognition that does not require a
separate action for judicial approval . Where, instead, a claim for recognition
is predicated on other evidence merely tending to prove paternity, i.e., outside of a
record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record or an authentic writing,
judicial action within the applicable statute of limitations is essential in order to
establish the child's acknowledgment. IADCES

A scrutiny of the records would show that petitioners were born during
the marriage of their parents . The certi cates of live birth would also identify
Danilo de Jesus as being their father.
There is perhaps no presumption of the law more rmly
established and founded on sounder morality and more convincing
reason than the presumption that children born in wedlock are
legitimate . This presumption indeed becomes conclusive in the absence of
proof that there is physical impossibility of access between the spouses during
the rst 120 days of the 300 days which immediately precedes the birth of the
child due to (a) the physical incapacity of the husband to have sexual intercourse
with his wife; (b) the fact that the husband and wife are living separately in such a
way that sexual intercourse is not possible; or (c) serious illness of the husband,
which absolutely prevents sexual intercourse. Quite remarkably, upon the
expiration of the periods set forth in Article 170, and in proper cases Article 171, of
the Family Code (which took effect on 03 August 1988), the action to impugn the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 legitimacy of a child would no longer be legally feasible and the status conferred
by the presumption becomes fixed and unassailable. 27 (Emphasis supplied)

Thus, applying the foregoing pronouncement to the instant case, it must be

concluded that petitioner — who was born on March 5, 1945, or during the marriage of
Alfredo Aguilar and Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar 28 and before their respective deaths 29 —
has su ciently proved that he is the legitimate issue of the Aguilar spouses. As petitioner
correctly argues, Alfredo Aguilar's SSS Form E-1 (Exhibit "G") satis es the requirement for
proof of liation and relationship to the Aguilar spouses under Article 172 of the Family
Code; by itself, said document constitutes an "admission of legitimate liation in a public
document or a private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned."
Petitioner has shown that he cannot produce his Certi cate of Live Birth since all the
records covering the period 1945-1946 of the Local Civil Registry of Bacolod City were
destroyed, which necessitated the introduction of other documentary evidence —
particularly Alfredo Aguilar's SSS Form E-1 (Exhibit "G") — to prove liation. It was
erroneous for the CA to treat said document as mere proof of open and continuous
possession of the status of a legitimate child under the second paragraph of Article 172
of the Family Code; it is evidence of liation under the rst paragraph thereof, the same
being an express recognition in a public instrument.
To repeat what was stated in De Jesus, liation may be proved by an admission of
legitimate liation in a public document or a private handwritten instrument and signed by
the parent concerned, and such due recognition in any authentic writing is, in itself, a
consummated act of acknowledgment of the child, and no further court action is required.
And, relative to said form of acknowledgment, the Court has further held that: HCEcaT

In view of the pronouncements herein made, the Court sees it t to adopt

the following rules respecting the requirement of a xing the signature of the
acknowledging parent in any private handwritten instrument wherein an
admission of filiation of a legitimate or illegitimate child is made:
1) Where the private handwritten instrument is the lone piece of
evidence submitted to prove liation, there should be strict compliance
with the requirement that the same must be signed by the
acknowledging parent; and
2) Where the private handwritten instrument is accompanied by other
relevant and competent evidence, it su ces that the claim of liation therein be
shown to have been made and handwritten by the acknowledging parent as it is
merely corroborative of such other evidence.
Our laws instruct that the welfare of the child shall be the "paramount
consideration" in resolving questions affecting him. Article 3(1) of the United
Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child of which the Philippines is a
signatory is similarly emphatic:
Article 3
1. In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public
or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative
authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a
primary consideration.
It is thus "(t)he policy of the Family Code to liberalize the rule on the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 investigation of the paternity and liation of children, especially of illegitimate
children . . . ." Too, "(t)he State as parens patriae affords special protection to
children from abuse, exploitation and other conditions prejudicial to their
development." 30 (Emphasis supplied)

This case should not have been so di cult for petitioner if only he obtained a copy
of his Certi cate of Live Birth from the National Statistics O ce (NSO), since the Bacolod
City Civil Registry copy thereof was destroyed. He would not have had to go through the
trouble of presenting other documentary evidence; the NSO copy would have sufficed. This
fact is not lost on petitioner; the Certi cation dated January 27, 1996 issued by the
Bacolod City Civil Registry (Exhibit "Q") contained just such an advice for petitioner to
proceed to the Office of the Civil Registrar General at the NSO in Manila to secure a copy of
his Certi cate of Live Birth, since for every registered birth in the country, a copy of the
Certificate of Live Birth is submitted to said office.
As to petitioner's argument that respondent has no personality to impugn his
legitimacy and cannot collaterally attack his legitimacy, and that the action to impugn his
legitimacy has already prescribed pursuant to Articles 170 and 171 of the Family Code, the
Court has held before that — TcEAIH

Article 263 31 refers to an action to impugn the legitimacy of a child, to

assert and prove that a person is not a man's child by his wife. However, the
present case is not one impugning petitioner's legitimacy. Respondents are
asserting not merely that petitioner is not a legitimate child of Jose, but that she
is not a child of Jose at all. 32

Finally, if petitioner has shown that he is the legitimate issue of the Aguilar spouses,
then he is as well heir to the latter's estate. Respondent is then left with no right to inherit
from her aunt Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar's estate, since succession pertains, in the rst
place, to the descending direct line. 33
WHEREFORE , the Petition is GRANTED . The August 30, 2006 Decision and
December 20, 2011 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CEB-CV No. 64229, as
well as the August 17, 1999 Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City, Branch 49
in Civil Case No. 96-9591 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE . Respondent Edna G. Siasat is
hereby ordered to SURRENDER to the petitioner Rodolfo S. Aguilar the owner's duplicates
of Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. T-25896 and T-(15462) 1070.
SO ORDERED .
Carpio, Velasco, Jr., * Mendoza and Leonen, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
* Per Special Order No. 1910 dated January 12, 2015.
1. Rollo, pp. 3-17.
2. Id. at 21-36; penned by Associate Justice Priscilla Baltazar-Padilla and concurred in by
Associate Justices Isaias P. Dicdican and Romeo F. Barza.
3. Id. at 51-52; penned by Associate Justice Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela and concurred in by
Associate Justices Pampio A. Abarintos and Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez.
4. CA rollo, pp. 41-47; penned by Judge Othello M. Villanueva.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 5. Rollo, pp. 37-44.
6. Id. at 6, 22; CA rollo, p. 41.
7. Records, pp. 1-6.

8. Id. at 22-29.
9. Id. at 203; rollo, pp. 29-30; CA rollo, pp. 43-44.
10. Rollo, pp. 24-25; CA rollo, pp. 44-45.
11. Id. at 26-27; id. at 45-46.
12. Id. at 27; id. at 45.

13. CA rollo, pp. 46-47.

14. Id. at 23-40.
15. Art. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the following:
(1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment; or

(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten

instrument and signed by the parent concerned.
In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be proved by:

(1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child; or
(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. (265a, 266a, 267a)
16. Petitioner was born on March 5, 1945.
17. CA rollo, p. 38.

18. Rollo, pp. 31-35.

19. Id. at 37-43.
20. Id. at 72-73.
21. Id. at 5-6.
22. Id. at 67-69.

23. Art. 170. The action to impugn the legitimacy of the child shall be brought within one year
from the knowledge of the birth or its recording in the civil register, if the husband or, in a
proper case, any of his heirs; should reside in the city or municipality where the birth took
place or was recorded.
If the husband or, in his default, all of his heirs do not reside at the place of birth as defined in
the first paragraph or where it was recorded, the period shall be two years if they should
reside in the Philippines; and three years if abroad. If the birth of the child has been
concealed from or was unknown to the husband or his heirs, the period shall be counted
from the discovery or knowledge of the birth of the child or of the fact of registration of
said birth, whichever is earlier. (263a)
Art. 171. The heirs of the husband may impugn the filiation of the child within the period
prescribed in the preceding article only in the following cases:
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 (1) If the husband should die before the expiration of the period fixed for bringing his action;
(2) If he should die after the filing of the complaint without having desisted therefrom; or
(3) If the child was born after the death of the husband. (262a)
24. Rollo, pp. 56-59.

25. Id. at 84-91.

26. 418 Phil. 768 (2001).
27. Id. at 772-775.
28. The Aguilar spouses were married on June 22, 1933.
29. Alfredo Aguilar passed away on August 26, 1983; Candelaria Siasat-Aguilar died on
February 8, 1994.
30. Dela Cruz v. Gracia, 612 Phil. 167, 179-180 (2009).

31. Of the CIVIL CODE, now Art. 170 of the FAMILY CODE.
32. Labagala v. Santiago, 422 Phil. 699, 708 (2001).
33. CIVIL CODE, Article 978.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com