1

FIRST DIVISION G.R. No. L-29901 August 31, 1977 MARTIN, J.:

1. CHUA vs. CFI FACTS: Jose Frias Chua first married Patricia S. Militar and they sired 3 children, namely: Ignacio, Lorenzo and Manuel. When Patricia died, Jose married Consolacion de la Torre and had a child, Juanito. Manuel died without leaving any issue. Then in 1929, Jose died intestate. In Intestate Proceeding, the lower court issued an order adjudicating, among others, the 1/2 portion of Lot No. 399 and the sum of P8,000 in favor Consolacion, the other half in favor of Juanito; P3,000 and P1,550 in favor of Lorenzo and Ignacio, respectively. Juanito then died intestate without any issue. Hence, his mother succeeded to his pro-indivisio share of Lot No. 399 and subsequently had a TCT on said lot. Then she died intestate leaving no direct heir either in the descending or ascending line except her brother and sisters. Hence, Ignacio, and Dominador and Remedios (legitimate children of the deceased Lorenzo) filed the complaint a quo before the respondent CFI of Negros Occidental praying that the 1/2 portion said lot be declared as a reservable property for the reason that the lot in question was subject to reserve troncal pursuant to Article 981 of the NCC. Respondent court dismissed the complaint. Hence, this instant petition. ISSUE:WON the subject property is subject to reserva troncal

HELD: Yes. Pursuant to the Art. 891 of the NCC, in order that a property may be impressed with a reservable character the following requisites must exist, to wit:

(1) that the property was acquired by a descendant from an asscendant or from a brother or sister by gratuitous title;

(2) that said descendant died without an issue; (3) that the property is inherited by another ascendant by operation of law; and (4) that there are relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which said property came.

In Cabardo v. Villanueva, "The transmission is gratuitous or by gratuitous title when the recipient does not give anything in return." The essential thing is that the person who transmits it does so from pure generosity, without requiring from the transferee any prestation. Per records, the obligation of paying the Standard Oil Co. of New York the amount of P3,971.20 is imposed upon Consolacion and Juanito not personally by the deceased Jose in his last will and testament but by an order of the court. This does not change the gratuitous nature of the transmission of the property to him. Said transmission to Juanito was by means of a hereditary succession and therefore gratuitous. The 1/2 pro-indiviso share of Lot 399 inherited by Consolacion was, however, subject to the condition that the property was reservable in character under Art. 891 of the Civil Code in favor of relatives within the third degree of Jose from whom the property came. These relatives are the petitioner herein. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the decision appealed from is hereby set aside. The petitioners Ignacio, Dominador and Remedios are declared owners of 1/2 undivided portion of Lot 399; and the Register of Deeds of Negros Occidental is hereby ordered to cancel TCT No. 31796 covering Lot No. 399 issued in the name of Consolacion and to issue a new COT in the names of Consolacion, 1/2 undivided portion; Ignacio, 1/4 undivided portion; and Dominador and Remedios, 1/4 undivided portion, of said lot.

2

2. EN BANC G.R. No. 6878 September 13, 1913 ARELLANO, C.J.: EDROSO vs. SABLAN FACTS: The subject matter of this appeal is the registration of certain property classified as required by law to be reserved. Marcelina Edroso applied for registration and issuance of title to 2 parcels of land situated in the municipality of Pagsanjan, Province of Laguna. Two applications were filed, one for each parcel, but both were heard and decided in a single judgment. Marcelina Edroso was married to Victoriano Sablan. They had a son named Pedro who inherited the 2 said parcels upon his father´s death in 1882. Pedro also died in 1902, unmarried and without issue. Then the 2 parcels of land passed through inheritance to his mother. Hence the hereditary title whereupon is based the application for registration of her ownership. Two legitimate brothers of Victoriano appeared in the case to oppose the registration. The Court of Land Registration denied the registration. Trial court denied the same and held that the property is required by law to be reserved and that in such a case application could only be presented jointly in the names of the mother and the said 2 uncles of Pedro Sablan. ISSUE: 1. WON the 2 parcels of land are required by law to be reserved 2. WON the right of action had already prescribed after the lapse of 90 days in accordance with the provisions of the Mortgage Law 3. WON the trial court erred in ruling that registration is to be presented jointly HELD: On Issue No. 1 Yes. Art. 811 provides that the ascendant who inherits from his descendant property which the latter acquired without a valuable consideration from another ascendant, or from a brother or sister, is under obligation to reserve what he has acquired by operation of law for the relatives who are within the third degree and belong to the line whence the property proceeded. When Pedro died without issue, his mother became his heir by virtue of her right to her son's legal portion under Art. 935 of the Civil Code: In the absence of legitimate children and descendants of the deceased, his ascendants shall inherit from him, to the exclusion of collaterals. Had Pedro instituted his mother in a will as the universal heiress of his property, all he left would not be required by law to be reserved, half of the hereditary estate of Pedro would be left to her. On Issue No. 2 No. The period of 90 days fixed by the Mortgage Law is not for the exercise of the right of action of the persons entitled to the right reserved, but for the fulfillment of the obligation of the person who must make the reservation. The lapse of the 90 days is not the expiration by prescription of the period for the right must be reserved, but really the commencement thereof. On Issue No. 3 Yes. The ascendant, in addition to being the usufructuary, he is the owner in fee simple of the property. Hence, he can dispose of it in the manner provided the Code whether or not there exists at the time of his death relatives within the 3rd degree of the descendants. If such relatives exist, they acquire ownership of the property at the death of the ascendant heir. If they do not exist, the ascendant heir can freely dispose thereof. If he has died, the relatives may rescind the alienation of the realty required by law to be reserved and they will complete ownership, in fee simple, because the condition and the usufruct have been terminated by the death of the usufructuary. The legal title is burdened with a condition that the 3rd party acquirer may ascertain from the registry in order to know that he is acquiring a title subject to a condition subsequent. Under pacto de retracto acquires all the rights of the vendor which allows him to register this same title after he has acquired it. Said title, however, has an annexed condition — that the alienation the purchaser may make will be terminated, if the vendor should exercise the right granted him by Art. 1507 which provides for the conventional redemption.

3

Therefore, the Court reverse the judgment appealed from, and in lieu thereof decide and declare that the applicant is entitled to register in her own name the 2 parcels of land which are the subject matter of the applicants, recording in the registration the right required by article 811 to be reserved to either or both of the opponents, Pablo and Basilio, should they survive her. 4. EN BANC G.R. No. L-10701 January 16, 1959 REYES, J.B.L., J.: CANO vs. DIRECTOR OF LANDS FACTS: In an amended decision dated October 9, 1951, issued in Land Registration Case No. 12, G.L.R.O. Rec. No. 2835, the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon decreed the registration of Lots Nos. 1798 and 1799 of the Juban (Sorsogon) Cadastre, under the following terms and conditions: In view of the foregoing, and it appearing that the notices have been duly published and posted as required by law, and that the title of the applicant to the above-mentioned two parcels of land is registrable in law, it is hereby adjudged and decreed, and with reaffirmation of the order of general default, that the two parcels of land described in plan SWO-24152, known as Lots Nos. 1798 and 1799 of the Cadastral Survey of Juban, with their improvements, be registered in the name of Maria Cano, Filipina, 71 years of age, widow and resident of Juban, province of Sorsogon, with the understanding that Lot No. 1799 shall be subject to the right of reservation in favor of Eustaquia Guerrero pursuant to Article 891 of the Civil code. After this decision shall have become final for lack of appeal therefrom within the 30-day period from its promulgation, let the corresponding decree issue. So ordered. (Rec. App. pp. 18-19) The decision having become final, the decree and the Certificate of Title (No. 0-20) were issued in the name of Maria Cano, subject to reserva troncal in favor of Eustaquia Guerrero. In October 1955, counsel for the reserve (reservatorio) Guerrero filed a motion with the Cadastral Court, alleging the death of the original registered owner and reservista, Maria Cano, on September 8, 1955, and praying that the original Certificate of Title be ordered cancelled and a new one issued in favor of movant Eustaquia Guerrero; and that the Sheriff be ordered to place her in possession of the property. The motion was opposed by Jose and Teotimo Fernandez, sons of thereservista Maria Cano, who contended that the application and operation of the reserva troncal should be ventilated in an ordinary contentious proceeding, and that the Registration Court did not have jurisdiction to grant the motion. In view of the recorded reserva in favor of the appellee, as expressly noted in the final decree of registration, the lower court granted the petition for the issuance of a new certificate, for the reason that the death of the reservistavested the ownership of the property in the petitioner as the sole reservatorio troncal. The oppositors, heirs of the reservista Maria Cano, duly appealed from the order, insisting that the ownership of the reservatorio can not be decreed in a mere proceeding under sec. 112 of Act 496, but requires a judicial administration proceedings, wherein the rights of appellee, as the reservatorio entitled to the reservable property, are to be declared. In this connection, appellants argue that the reversion in favor of the reservatorio requires the declaration of the existence of the following facts: (1) The property was received by a descendant by gratuitous title from an ascendant or from a brother or sister; (2) Said descendant dies without issue; (3) The property is inherited by another ascendant by operation of law; and (4) The existence of relatives within the third degree belonging the line from which said property came. (Appellants' Brief, p. 8) We find the appeal untenable. The requisites enumerated by appellants have already been declared to exist by the decree of registration wherein the rights of the appellee as reservatario troncal were expressly recognized: From the above-quoted agreed stipulation of facts, it is evident that Lot No. 1799 was acquired by the Appellant Maria Cano by inheritance from her deceased daughter, Lourdes Guerrero who, in turn, inherited the same from her father Evaristo Guerrero and, hence, falls squarely under the provisions of Article 891 of the Civil Code; and that each and everyone of the private oppositors are within the third degree of consaguinity of the decedent Evaristo Guerrero, and who belonging to the same line from which the property came. It appears however, from the agreed stipulation of facts that with the exception of Eustaquia Guerrero, who is the only living daughter of the decedent Evaristo Guerrero, by his former marriage, all the other oppositors are grandchildren of the said Evaristo Guerrero by his former marriages. Eustaquia Guerrero, being the nearest of kin, excludes all the other private oppositors, whose decree of relationship to the decedent is remoter (Article 962, Civil Code; Director of Lands vs. Aguas, 62 Phil., 279). (Rec. App. pp. 16-17)

4

This decree having become final, all persons (appellees included) are bared thereby from contesting the existence of the constituent elements of the reserva. The only requisites for the passing of the title from the reservista to the appellee are: (1) the death of the reservista; and (2) the fact that the reservatario has survived the reservista. Both facts are admitted, and their existence is nowhere questioned. The contention that an intestacy proceeding is still necessary rests upon the assumption that the reservatario will succeed in, or inherit, the reservable property from the reservista. This is not true. The reservatario is not thereservista's successor mortis causa nor is the reservable property part of the reservista's estate; the reservatarioreceives the property as a conditional heir of the descendant ( prepositus), said property merely reverting to the line of origin from which it had temporarily and accidentally strayed during the reservista's lifetime. The authorities are all agreed that there being reservatarios that survive the reservista, the latter must be deemed to have enjoined no more than a life interest in the reservable property. It is a consequence of these principles that upon the death of the reservista, the reservatario nearest to theprepositus (the appellee in this case) becomes, automatically and by operation of law, the owner of the reservable property. As already stated, that property is no part of the estate of the reservista, and does not even answer for the debts of the latter. Hence, its acquisition by the reservatario may be entered in the property records without necessity of estate proceedings, since the basic requisites therefor appear of record. It is equally well settled that the reservable property can not be transmitted by a reservista to her or his own successors mortis causa,(like appellants herein) so long as a reservatario within the third degree from the prepositus and belonging to the line whence the property came, is in existence when the reservista dies. Of course, where the registration decree merely specifies the reservable character of the property, without determining the identity of the reservatario (as in the case of Director of Lands vs. Aguas, 63 Phil., 279) or where several reservatarios dispute the property among themselves, further proceedings would be unavoidable. But this is not the case. The rights of the reservataria Eustaquia Guerrero have been expressly recognized, and it is nowhere claimed that there are other reservatarios of equal or nearer degree. It is thus apparent that the heirs of the reservista are merely endeavoring to prolong their enjoyment of the reservable property to the detriment of the party lawfully entitled thereto. We find no error in the order appealed from and therefore, the same is affirmed with costs against appellants in both instances. So ordered. 5. SECOND DIVISION G.R. No. L-34395 May 19, 1981 AQUINO, J.: GONZALES vs. CFI FACTS: Benito Legarda y Tuason had 3 children: Benito, Consuelo and Rita. His son, Benito died in 1933 and was survived by his widow, Filomena Races and 7 children. Six years later, Benito Legarda y Tuason died and left real properties which were partitioned by his daughters and the heirs of his deceased son. Years after, one of the 7 children, Filomena, died intestate and without issue. Her sole heiress was her mother, Filomena Races. Thus, she executed an affidavit adjudicating extrajudicially to herself the properties which she inherited from her deceased daughter which include savings deposit, shares, and various titled lands. She succeeded her deceased daughter as co-owner of the properties held proindiviso by her other 6 children. Eventually, she disposed of said properties in favor of the children of her 3 sons (16 grandchildren in all). Then Filomena Races and her 6 surviving children partitioned the properties consisting of the 1/3 share in the estate of Benito Legarda y Tuason which they inherited in representation of their father, Benito. Filomena Races died leaving a holographic will which was probated. In the testate proceeding, Beatriz, a daughter of the testatrix, filed a motion to exclude from the inventory of her mother's estate the properties which she inherited from her deceased daughter on the ground that said properties are reservable properties which should be inherited by the siblings of the deceased and not by the children of the 3 brothers only. The lower court dismissed the action of Beatriz. Hence, this instant petition.

5

ISSUE: WON Filomena Races could dispose the said reservable to the reservees (grandchildren) within third degree bypassing the reservees in the second degree (children) HELD: No. Filomena Races could not convey in her holographic will to her 16 grandchildren the reservable properties which she had inherited from her daughter Filomena because the reservable properties did not form part of her estate. The reservor cannot make a disposition mortis causa of the reservable properties as long as the reservees survived the reservor. The reservor's alienation of the reservable property is subject to a resolutory condition, meaning that if at the time of the reservor's death, there are reservees, the transferee of the property should deliver it to the reservees. If there are no reservees at the time of the reservor's death, the transferee's title would become absolute. The reservee cannot impugn any conveyance made by the reservor but he can require that the reservable character of the property be recognized by the purchaser and, for this purpose, he can compel the annotation of his right in the registry of property even while the reservista is alive. Hence, upon the reservista's death, the reservatario nearest to the prepositus becomes "automatically and by operation of law, the owner of the reservable property." Article 891 clearly indicates that the reservable properties should be inherited by all the nearest relatives within the third degree from the prepositus who in this case are the 6 children of Filomena Races. She could not select the reservees to whom the reservable property should be given and deprive the other reservees of their share therein. To allow the reservor in this case to make a testamentary disposition of the reservable properties in favor of the reservees in the third degree and, consequently, to ignore the reservees in the second degree would be a glaring violation of article 891. That testamentary disposition cannot be allowed. WHEREFORE, the lower court's decision is reversed and set aside. lt is hereby adjudged that the properties inherited by Filomena Roces Vda. de Legarda from her daughter Filomena Legarda, with all the fruits and accessions thereof, are reservable properties which belong to Beatriz, Rosario, Teresa, Benito, Alejandro and Jose, all surnamed Legarda y Roces, as reservees. The shares of Rosario L. Valdes and Benito F. Legarda, who died in 1969 and 1973, respectively, should pertain to their respective heirs. Costs against the private respondents. NOTE: In reserve troncal (1) a descendant inherited or acquired by gratuitous title property from an ascendant or from a brother or sister; (2) the same property is inherited by another ascendant or is acquired by him by operation of law from the said descendant, and (3) the said ascendant should reserve the said property for the benefit of relatives who are within the third degree from the deceased descendant (prepositus) and who belong to the line from which the said property came. So, three transmissions are involved: (1) a first transmission by lucrative title (inheritance or donation) from an ascendant or brother or sister to the deceased descendant; (2) a posterior transmission, by operation of law (intestate succession or legitime) from the deceased descendant (causante de la reserve) in favor of another ascendant, the reservor or reservista, which two transmissions precede the reservation, and (3) a third transmissions of the same property (in consequence of the reservation) from the reservor to the reservees (reservatarios) or the relatives within the third degree from the deceased descendant belonging to the line of the first ascendant, brother or sister of the deceased descendant.

6

The persons involved in reserve troncal are (1) the ascendant or brother or sister from whom the property was received by the descendant by lucrative or gratuitous title, (2) the descendant or prepositus (prepositus) who received the property, (3) the reservor (reservista) the other ascendant who obtained the property from the (prepositus) by operation of law and (4) the reserves (reservatario) who is within the third degree from the prepositus and who belongs to the (line o tronco) from which the property came and for whom the property should be reserved by the reservor. The reservees may be half-brothers and sisters. Fourth degree relatives are not included. Reserva troncal contemplates legitimate relationship. Illegitimate relationship and relationship by affinity are excluded. The reserva creates two resolutory conditions, namely, (1) the death of the ascendant obliged to reserve and (2) the survival, at the time of his death, of relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which the property came (Sienes vs. E Esparcia l l l Phil. 349, 353).