Scribd
Upload
77 views1 page

ROSA K. KALAW, Petitioner, - Versus - HON. JUDGE BENJAMIN RELOVA, Presiding Judge of The

1) Gregorio K. Kalaw filed a petition to probate his deceased sister's holographic will which originally named Rosa K. Kalaw as sole heir. The will contained alterations crossing out Rosa's name and writing in "Rosario" as heir and crossing out Rosa as executrix, writing in Gregorio with initials. 2) Rosa opposed probate, arguing the alterations were invalid since not properly authenticated by the testatrix's full signature. The court denied probate, finding the alterations voided the entire will since they changed the sole substantial provision without proper authentication. 3) On reconsideration, the court upheld the denial, reasoning that when a holographic will

Uploaded by

amado espejo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
77 views1 page

ROSA K. KALAW, Petitioner, - Versus - HON. JUDGE BENJAMIN RELOVA, Presiding Judge of The

1) Gregorio K. Kalaw filed a petition to probate his deceased sister's holographic will which originally named Rosa K. Kalaw as sole heir. The will contained alterations crossing out Rosa's name and writing in "Rosario" as heir and crossing out Rosa as executrix, writing in Gregorio with initials. 2) Rosa opposed probate, arguing the alterations were invalid since not properly authenticated by the testatrix's full signature. The court denied probate, finding the alterations voided the entire will since they changed the sole substantial provision without proper authentication. 3) On reconsideration, the court upheld the denial, reasoning that when a holographic will

Uploaded by

amado espejo
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

ROSA K. KALAW, Petitioner, -versus – HON.

JUDGE BENJAMIN RELOVA, Presiding


Judge of the
CFI of Batangas, Branch VI, Lipa City, and GREGORIO K. KALAW, Respondents.

FACTS
Private respondent GREGORIO K. KALAW, claiming to be the sole heir of his deceased sister,
Natividad K. Kalaw, filed a petition for the probate of her holographic Will. The holographic Will, as
first written, named ROSA K. Kalaw, a sister of the testatrix as her sole heir.
The will contained two (2) alterations: a) Rosa's name, designated as the sole heir was crossed out
and instead "Rosario" was written above it. Such was not initialed, b) Rosa's name was crossed out as
sole executrix and Gregorio's name was written above it. This alteration was initialed by the testator.
Hence, on November 10, 1971, petitioner ROSA K. Kalaw opposed probate alleging, in substance,
that the holographic Will contained alterations, corrections, and insertions without the proper
authentication by the full signature of the testatrix as required by Article 814 of the Civil Code.
After trial, respondent Judge denied probate in an Order. From that Order, GREGORIO moved for
reconsideration arguing that since the alterations and/or insertions were the testatrix, the denial to
probate of her holographic Will would be contrary to her right of testamentary disposition.

ISSUE
Whether the will is valid (NO)

RULING
Ordinarily, when a number of erasures, corrections, and interlineations made by the testator in a
holographic Will, item not been noted under his signature, ... the Will is not thereby invalidated as a
whole, but at most only as respects the particular words erased, corrected or interlined. Manresa gave
an Identical commentary when he said "la omision de la salvedad no anula el testamento, segun la
regla de jurisprudencia establecida en la sentencia de 4 de Abril de 1895." However, when as in this
case, the holographic Will in dispute had only one substantial provision, which was altered by
substituting the original heir with another, but which alteration did not carry the requisite of full
authentication by the full signature of the testator, the effect must be that the entire Will is voided or
revoked for the simple reason that nothing remains in the Will after that which could remain valid.
To state that the Will as first written should be given efficacy is to disregard the seeming change of
mind of the testatrix. But that change of mind can neither be given effect because she failed to
authenticate it in the manner required by law by affixing her full signature. The ruling in Velasco,
supra, must be held confined to such insertions, cancellations, erasures or alterations in a holographic
Will, which affect only the efficacy of the altered words themselves but not the essence and validity
of the Will itself. As it is, with the erasures, cancellations and alterations made by the testatrix herein,
her real intention cannot be determined with certitude.

You might also like