Sunday, April 11, 2021

Dr. Jorge Rabadilla vs. CA, GR. No. 113725, June 29, 2000

DOCTRINE: The institution of an heir in the manner prescribed in Article 882 is what is known in the law of succession as an institucion sub modo or a modal institution. In a modal institution, the testator states (1) the, object of the institution, the purpose or application of the property left by the testator, or the charge imposed by the testator upon the heir.

CASE TITLE: Dr. Jorge Rabadilla vs. CA , GR. No. 113725, June 29, 2000, J. PURISIMA

FACTS

In a Codicil appended to the Last Will and Testament of testatrix Aleja Belleza, Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, predecessor-in-interest of the herein petitioner, Johnny S. Rabadilla, was instituted as a devisee of 511, 855 square meters of that parcel of land surveyed as Lot No. 1392 of the Bacolod Cadastre.

Pursuant to the same Codicil, Lot No. 1392 was transferred to the deceased, Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, and Transfer Certificate of Title No. 44498 thereto issued in his name. Dr. Jorge Rabadilla died in 1983 and was survived by his wife Rufina and children Johnny (petitioner), Aurora, Ofelia and Zenaida, all surnamed Rabadilla.

On August 21, 1989, Maria Marlena Coscolluela y Belleza Villacarlos brought a complaint, Regional Trial Court in Bacolod City, against the heirs of Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, to enforce the provisions of subject Codicil. She alleged that defendant-heirs failed to comply with their obligation to deliver 100 piculs of sugar to Maria Marlena from sugar crop years 1985 up to the filing of the complaint as mandated by the Codicil, despite repeated demands for compliance.

The plaintiff then prayed that judgment be rendered ordering defendant-heirs to reconvey/return-Lot No. 1392 to the surviving heirs of the late Aleja Belleza, the cancellation of TCT No. 44498 in the name of the deceased, Dr. Jorge Rabadilla, and the issuance of a new certificate of title in the names of the surviving heirs of the late Aleja Belleza.

The RTC dismissed without prejudice the complaint being prematurely filed. On appeal by plaintiff, the First Division of the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the trial court. Accordingly, the decision appealed from is SET ASIDE and another one entered ordering defendants-appellees, as heirs of Jorge Rabadilla, to reconvey title over Lot No. 1392, together with its fruits and interests, to the estate of Aleja Belleza.

Hence this present petition.

ISSUE

Whether there was no modal institution, and the testatrix intended a mere simple substitution.

HELD

NO. The institution of an heir in the manner prescribed in Article 882 is what is known in the law of succession as an institucion sub modo or a modal institution. The institution of an heir in the manner prescribed in Article 882 is what is known in the law of succession as an institucion sub modo or a modal institution. In a modal institution, the testator states (1) the, object of the institution, the purpose or application of the property left by the testator, or the charge imposed by the testator upon the heir. A "mode" imposes an obligation upon the heir or legatee, but it does not affect the efficacy of his rights to the succession.

From the provisions of the Codicil litigated upon, it can be gleaned unerringly that the testatrix intended that subject property be inherited by Dr. Jorge Rabadilla. It is likewise clearly worded that the testatrix imposed an obligation on the said instituted heir and his successors-in-interest to deliver one hundred piculs of sugar to the herein private respondent, Marlena Coscolluela Belleza, during the lifetime of the latter. However, the testatrix did not make Dr. Jorge Rabadilla's inheritance and the effectivity of his institution as a devisee, dependent on the performance of the said obligation. It is clear, though, that should the obligation be not complied with, the property shall be turned over to the testatrix's near descendants. The manner of institution of Dr. Jorge Rabadilla under subject Codicil is evidently modal in nature because it imposes a charge upon the instituted heir without, however, affecting the efficacy of such institution.

Then too, since testamentary dispositions are generally act of liberality, an obligation imposed upon the heir should not be considered a condition unless it clearly appears from the Will itself that such was the intention of the testator. In case of doubt, the institution should be considered as modal and not conditional.

No comments:

Post a Comment