Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-46364, April 6, 1990 Case Digest

Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No.
L-46364, 184 SCRA 190, April 6, 1990;

FACTS:
The entire parcel of land formerly belonged to Fermin Jimenez. Fermin Jimenez has two (2) sons
named Fortunato and Carlos Jimenez. This Fortunato Jimenez who predeceased his father has
only one child, the petitioner Sulpicia Jimenez.
After the death of Fermin Jimenez, the entire parcel of land was registered under Act 496 in the
name of Carlos Jimenez and Sulpicia Jimenez (uncle and niece) in equal shares pro-indiviso. As
a result of the registration case Original Certificate of Title No. 50933 (Exhibit 8) was issued on
February 28, 1933, in the names of Carlos Jimenez and Sulpicia Jimenez, in equal shares pro-
indiviso.
Carlos Jimenez died on July 9, 1936 and his illegitimate daughter, Melecia Cayabyab, also
known as Melecia Jimenez, took possession of the eastern portion of the property.
On January 20, 1944, Melecia Jimenez sold said eastern portion of the property to Edilberto
Cagampan and defendant Teodora Grado executed a contract entitled "Exchange of Real
Properties" whereby the former transferred said 436 square meter-portion to the latter, who has
been in occupation since.
On August 29, 1969, plaintiff Sulpicia Jimenez executed an affidavit adjudicating unto herself
the other half of the property appertaining to Carlos Jimenez, upon manifestation that she is the
only heir of her deceased uncle. Consequently Transfer Certificate of Title No. 82275 was issued
on October 1, 1969 in petitioner's name alone over the entire 2,932 square meter property.
On April 1, 1970, Sulpicia Jimenez, joined by her husband, instituted the present action for the
recovery of the eastern portion of the property consisting of 436 square meters occupied by
defendant Teodora Grado and her son.
Trial Court favored, Teodora Grado.
CA affirmed the Trial Court’s decision.
ISSUE:
WON the Eastern portion of the property now belongs to Teodora Grado.
RULING:
NO. It belongs to Sulpicia Jiminez.
From the start the respondent court erred in not declaring that Melecia Jimenez Cayabyab also
known as Melecia Jimenez, is not the daughter of Carlos Jimenez and therefore, had no right
over the property in question. Respondents failed to present concrete evidence to prove that
Melecia Cayabyab was really the daughter of Carlos Jimenez. Nonetheless, assuming for the
sake of argument that Melecia Cayabyab was the illegitimate daughter of Carlos Jimenez there
can be no question that Melecia Cayabyab had no right to succeed to the estate of Carlos Jimenez
and could not have validly acquired, nor legally transferred to Edilberto Cagampan that portion
of the property subject of this petition.
It is well-settled in this jurisdiction that the rights to the succession are transmitted from the
moment of the death of the decedent (Art. 777, Civil Code). Moreover, Art. 2263 of the Civil
Code provides as follows:
Rights to the inheritance of a person who died with or without a will, before the effectivity of
this Code, shall be governed by the Civil Code of 1889, by other previous laws, and by the Rules
of Court . . . (Rollo, p. 17)
Thus, since Carlos Jimenez, owner of one-half pro-indiviso portion of that parcel of land then
covered by Original Certificate of title No. 50933, died on July 9, 1936 (Exhibit "F") way before
the effectivity of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the successional rights pertaining to his estate
must be determined in accordance with the Civil Code of 1889.
Citing the case of Cid v. Burnaman (24 SCRA 434) wherein this Court categorically held that:
To be an heir under the rules of Civil Code of 1889 (which was the law in force when Carlos
Jimenez died and which should be the governing law in so far as the right to inherit from his
estate was concerned), a child must be either a child legitimate, legitimated, or adopted, or else
an acknowledged natural child — for illegitimate not natural are disqualified to inherit. (Civil
Code of 1889, Art. 807, 935)
Even assuming that Melecia Cayabyab was born out of the common-law-relationship between
her mother (Maria Cayabyab) and Carlos Jimenez, she could not even be considered an
acknowledged natural child because Carlos Jimenez was then legally married to Susana Abalos
and therefore not qualified to marry Maria Cayabyab and consequently Melecia Cayabyab was
an illegitimate spurious child and not entitled to any successional rights in so far as the estate of
Carlos Jimenez was concerned.
Melecia Cayabyab in the absence of any voluntary conveyance to her by Carlos Jimenez or
Sulpicia Jimenez of the litigated portion of the land could not even legally transfer the parcel of
land to Edilberto Cagampan who accordingly, could not also legally transfer the same to herein
private respondents.
Petitioner Sulpicia Jimenez is entitled to the relief prayed for, declaring her to be the sole and
absolute owner of the land in question with right to its possession and enjoyment. Since her
uncle Carlos Jimenez died in 1936, his pro-indiviso share in the properties then owned in co-
ownership with his niece Sulpicia descended by intestacy to Sulpicia Jimenez alone because
Carlos died without any issue or other heirs.

Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-46364, April 6, 1990 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-46364, April 6, 1990 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. L-46364, April 6, 1990 Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Jimenez vs. Fernandez, G.R. No.

L-46364, 184 SCRA 190, April 6, 1990;

You might also like