[No.

47931. June 27, 1941]

Estate of the late Rev. Fr. Eleuterio Pilapil . ADRIAN MENDOZA,

applicant and appealed against PILAPIL CALIXTO AND
OTHERS, opponents and appellants.

1 1. WILLS; Legalization; The testator that his WILL NOT VENT
IN JUZGADO.-The disposition of the testator that his "Last Will and
Testament not be heard by the court" can not strip the courts of their
authority to determine if your referral will It is legalized or not. There
are stakeholders in one way or another on an issue, which can confer or
remove jurisdiction and authority to the courts to resolve and decide
what we want the same law is resolved and decided. Please note that the
law requires, under penalty, to be delivered to the court the Wills made
by a testator dies after this, by the person entrusted with their care, so
they can undoubtedly determine whether their Legalization and can at
the same time dispose of their property as mandated therein; or, on the
contrary, should declarrsele died intestate, not be subject to
legalization which has been granted. (Arts. 626 to 631, Act No. 190.)

1 2. ID .; ID.; PAGE; CLAUSE ATESTIGUAMIENTO.-Y As for the
exhibits A and C can not be legalized because they were not prepared
and signed in accordance with the law, saying that their pages are not
numbered with letters; and because in its clause witnessing is not
expressed that they were signed by the three attesting witnesses, in the
presence of the testator, it is sufficient to draw attention to the fact that
the bottom of the first page is in letters note that says clearly: " Go to the
2nd page "; and the fact that alpie of the second page, there is this other
note: "Go to 3." page "and suffice also draw attention to the first two
lines of said third page is the last, where to complete the provision is
contained in the last paragraph of the previous page, or second reads as
follows:" * * * consists of two items; contains sixteen provisions and is
written on three pages, "which agrees closely with the true facts as they
appear in the aforementioned two exhibits, because actually contain two
items and sixteen provisions, not more, not less.

1 3. ID .; ID .; ID .; Id.-in clause of witnessing a Testament and a copy of
the subject matter, it is claimed by the three attesting witnesses who
signed it, "the pre-inserted last will and testament has been signed, and
declared by the jury testator, Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence of
us all "; to beg of the testator, we signed each one of us, here in Cebu,

Cebu, IF, today November 27, 1935 to beg of the testator and
immediately afterwards, by the same witnesses also states "The phrase."
"attached to that he signed and signed his will. in the presence of
attesting witnesses, permits and justifies the inference that the testator
was present when the last stamped their signatures there.

1 4. ; ID .; ID .; ID .; PURPOSE OF THE law.-The purpose of the law
to establish the formalities required in a will, is undoubtedly ensure and
guarantee their authenticity against bad faith and fraud, to prevent those
who have no right to succeed the testator, will happen and win-win with
the legalization of same. That purpose is fulfilled in the event that there
has been talk because, in the same body of the will and on the same page
where the attestation clause appears, that is the third, it expresses the
will consists of three pages; and that each of the first two partly takes
note in letters and partly in figures note, that are respectively the first
and second pages of the same. These facts clearly excludes all fear,
suspicion, or shadow of a doubt that it has replaced one of its pages with
another.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Cebu.

Natividad , J.

The facts are stated in the decision of the Court .
Filemon Sotto D. and D. G. Numerian representing Estenzo the
appellants.
Alonso and Alonso for appellee .

DIAZ, M .:

The main issues that opponents have us for resolution, to
appeal the decision of the Court of First Instance of Cebu,
handed down in Case No. 407 probate of the Court , can be
reduced to the following :

1. " If the Court of Cebu could name the March 4, 1939 , the
appellee as special administrator of the estate of the
decedent relics Eleuterio P. Pilapil (record of estate No.

407 ) , being as it was then acting as administrator of the

same goods , from February 7, 1939 , the appellant Calixto
Pilapil , quo promoted a day earlier, the same record
Intestado late Eleuterio P. Pilapil , in this Court ( file No.
399, Court of Cebu ) ;
2. 2. " If you came and proceeds legalization as a will or
living will of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil , the document
obrante cars as Exhibit A is a duplicate of the coal Exhibit
C.

The relevant facts to be taken into account in resolving the
issues proposed are, as reflected by the appealed decision and
the same documents as the Court declared to be last will and
testament of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil, which are reported
below:

Father Eleuterio Pilapil, being parish priest of Mualboal of Cebu
Province, died in the city of that name on 6 December 1935.
any of his will after his death presented absence. at least until
early February 1939, his brother Calixto promoted Pilapil said
on 6 month and year, the case of intestacy No. 399 to ask was
appointed administrator of the estate of his relics. Test
received the request submitted for such purpose, prior
publication of notices prescribed by law, and the court hearing
prior to that there appeared to oppose it, among whom were
the same Simeona Pilapil appealed and the court granted it,
thereupon appointed him administrator of the Intestate. Within
a few days, or the March 4, 1939, the respondent in turn
promoted the record No. 407 that has been mentioned before,
to demand the legalization as a testament of the late P.
Eleuterio Pilapil, the Exhibit A that is the duplicate to coal
Exhibit C. There are between clauses of these two documents,
which are then inserted by its relevance to the issues raised
and also the importance of:

"I, Eleuterio Pilapil, priest of the Roman Catholic Church
naturally, sixty-eight years old, of Liloan currently parish priest

of the Parish of Mualboal, Cebu Province, IF, health and

enjoying full use of sound mind, do hereby, public, declared and
awarded the following as MI TEST AMENTO Y L TIMA
VOLUNT AD:
"ART FIRST. I institute and appoint Mr. Adrian Mendoza, my
nephew, married, of age and a resident of the Municipality of
Liloan, Cebu Province, IF, EXECUTOR-executor of this my last
will and testament: Provided, That in the event of incapacity,
negligence or other cause with that it embarrasses enforce this
my last will and testament, through bail, dispose and ordered it
to be replaced in the position of albaceaejecutor this my last
will and testament, by my cousin, Joseph Cabatingan, married,
of age, resident of the Municipality of Mualboal, Cebu Province,
IF, who was in charge and will make this my following
provisions are met:

* * * * * * *
"2.a I dispose 2D and ordered that this my last will and
testament NOT be heard by the Court , since this last will and
testament , simply corroborates claims and ensures the
legitimacy of the documents for the sale of my property;

* * * * * * *
"ART TWO: By this , I note that this my last will and testament ,
which corroborates claims and ensures the legitimacy of
documents by my given to buyers consists of two articles ,
contains sixteen provisions and is written on three pages ;

* * * * * * *
" Cebu, Cebu , IF, today 27 November 1935.
(Signed ) "ELEUTERIO Pilapil



Testator";

at the end thereof ( exhibits A and C ), there witnessing this
clause :

"When shall read:

BLESS YOU,
We who have signed below , we state : That the pre - inserted
last will and testament , was signed , declared and sworn by the
testator , Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the presence of all of us and
pray that testator signed each us in the presence of us here in
Cebu, Cebu , IF, today November 27, 1935.
"WENCESLAO PILAPIL

"Witness

"Witness

"Witness"

"MARCELO PlLAPIL

"EUGENIO K. PlLAPIL

The two documents , exhibits A and C , consist of three pages ;

and in the left margin of each of the first two , firms that are at
the end of the main body of these documents and their
attestation clause appear ; and they are, according to the
evidence , signatures of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil , and
witnessesPilapil Wenceslao Marcelo Pilapil and Eugene K.
Pilapil .

In the place of the date both of the two documents and their
attestation clause , it is written the word " Cebu " on something
that tried to scratch but can still be saying " Mualboal " ; and
also shows the numeral " 27 " and the name of the month :
"November " , the latter written on a scraped word can also be
seen that even without any difficulty , at least in Exhibit A,
which reads: "October" . In the last paragraph on page 2 which
then appears on the first two lines of the next page (page)
3) , which is the last , there are the following specific mention :
"contains sixteen provisions and is written on three pages." At
the foot of the PA- pages ( 1) and ( 2) there is respectively these

notes: " Go to the 2nd page. " ; " Go to 3" . page " . And it should
be noted that both the one and the other of the aforementioned
Exhibits A and C , no more than two articles ( " Art. First " and "
Art. Second " ) , and sixteen provisions .

The grounds on which the appellants rely on to argue that
legalization is not appropriate for any of the two documents
expressed as a testament of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil , are
these:
1 (a) They contain erasures and alterations that the
respondent failed to explain; 2 (b) That has not been
proved that the deceased , prescinding from what is stated
in those documents exhibits A and C , it was appropriate
age for testing ; 3 (c) is not proved that the deceased
owned Spanish is the language in which referrals are
written documents ; 4 (d) That in one of the clauses of
these documents there is ban which aired in the courts ; 5 (
e) neither it has been prepared , signed and witnessed in
accordance with the provisions of Article 618 of the Code
of Civil Procedure.

With regard to the first question, it must be said that, as he tells
us the same piece of Appeals of the appellants, the two cases
Nos. 399 and 407 were promoted in two different chambers of
the Court of First Instance of Cebu. The first was promoted in
Division III; and the last , in Room II . Upon hearing the judge of
one of those boards that there was a direct relationship
between the two, he ordered that the two were known by a
single Judge.

Hence, both were considered as one to avoid what the judge
said: " inconsistency in the administration of the estate of the
deceased ," referring to the late Eleuterio P. Pilapil.
Certainly he did not lack reason to Cebu Court to appoint a
special administrator in case No. 407, the appellee, because in

the documents that there is trying to legalize as a testament

and living will of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil, has commissioned
Express it to be. Moreover, there was not no law that prohibits
the courts hearing a record of probate or intestate, appoint an
administrator over; and, in the case in question it happened to
be annulled the appointment of the appellant as an
administrator, then the two mentioned records were melted.
More still; if the purpose of the appellants to raise the question
of which we are speaking, is to rescind the appointment issued
to appellee as special administrator, is vain and foolish must be
that way, because to insist on it is equivalent to being appealing
to a court order appointing a special administrator; and the law
does not allow appeals against orders of this nature. It is final
disposition of law that says: "The appeal is not allowed against
the appointment of the special administrator. "(Art. 660, Act
No. 190.)

In addition to all this it must be said that if there was an error
in the appointment of the respondent as special administrator,
for the reason that other property was already appointed by
the court , the error , if such it can be called , has not been so
nature has caused any harm to anyone, especially to the estate
of the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil.
Scratches and changes that are noted in Ios exhibits A and C are
some facts that now, for the first time, and in this instance, you
want to get attention, when it should have been done while the
case was still in court of its origin. We can not take them into
account in the present state of the proceedings because,
assuming that existed then, it can and should be said, but did
not say in explicit terms the Court of Cebu, which held that no
such documents vitiated; as it is rebuttable presumption that
"all the facts concerning the points discussed at trial were
presented to the court and appreciated by him." (Art. 334, par.
16, Law No. 190.) And indeed vitiated not because it follows
from the same circumstances, they did just to put things in
their proper place. The two exhibits A and C were prepared by

the late P. Eleuterio Pilapil in Mualboal where he was parish

priest, before being transferred to be treated for his illness that
caused his death, the Southern Islands Cebu Hospital, where he
died. He basing the Court on these facts that were tested in
court, he said: "The intervention of three attesting witnesses of
the document took place in a haphazard way, on the occasion in
which they were to visit Eleuterio Pilapil who was ill at the
Southern Islands Hospital, where the deceased today asked
them to act as witnesses of the document and was then
prepared. "
To prepare it, being in Mualboal , it was no more than natural
that expressed in it that were prepared there, and leave blank
the date but still put the name of the month that were put into
clean, ie October 1935 .

As for the age of the testator as to whether he spoke Spanish is
the language in which they are written the two exhibits , or not,
it must be said that being a priest and parish priest of Mualboal,
Cebu reasonably be presumed that was old competent to test ,
and understood and spoke Spanish , because it is generally
known that for a parish priest , one must be a priest , and to be,
many years of study are needed in seminars where Spanish is
spoken a language as official as English . Moreover, no evidence
has been proved that the testator did not understand that
language.
To prepare it, being in Mualboal, it was no more than natural
that expressed in it that were prepared there, and leave blank
the date but still put the name of the month that were put into
clean, ie October 1935.

The disposition of the testator that his "Last Will and
Testament not be heard by the court" can not strip the courts of
their authority to determine if your will is referred legalizable
or not. There are stakeholders in one way or another on an
issue, which can confer or remove jurisdiction and authority to

the courts to resolve and decide what we want the same law is
resolved and decided. Please note that the law requires, under
penalty, to be delivered to the court the Wills made by a
testator dies after this, by the person entrusted with their care,
so they can undoubtedly determine whether their Legalization
and can at the same time dispose of their property as mandated
therein; or, on the contrary, should declare died intestate, not
be subject to legalization which has been granted. (Arts. 626 to
631, Act No. 190.) In addition, the testator not being a lawyer,
it's no wonder he has stated in his will the ban, -using their
very words, "normal ventilation in the Court ".

And insofar as the exhibits A and C can not be legalized because
they were not prepared or were signed in accordance with the
law , saying that their pages are not numbered with letters ;
and because in its clause witnessing is not expressed that they
were signed by the three attesting witnesses , in the presence
of the testator , it is sufficient to draw attention to the fact that
the bottom of the first page is in letters note that says clearly: "
Go to 2 "page "and the fact that , at the bottom of the second
page, there is this other note : " Go to 3; " page. " and suffice
also draw attention to the first two lines of said third page is
the last , where to complete the provision is contained in the
last paragraph of the previous page , or second , it is stated:
" * * * It consists of two articles , contains sixteen provisions
and is written on three pages "
which agrees closely with the true facts as they appear in the
aforementioned two exhibits , because actually contain two
items and sixteen provisions , not more , not less .
In the attestation clause on again and copy the object
Testament issue, three attesting witnesses who signed it states
that

"pre- insert the Last Will and Testament , has been signed , and
jury declared by the testator , Rev. P. Eleuterio Pilapil in the
presence of us all"; and immediately afterwards , by the same

witnesses also it states :

"to beg of the testator , we signed each one of us, here in Cebu,
Cebu , IF, today 27 November 1935. "
The phrase "to beg of the testator", coupled with that signed
and signed his will in the presence of attesting witnesses,
permits and justifies the inference that the testator was present
when the last stamped their signatures there.

The purpose of the law to establish the formalities required in a
will, it is undoubtedly ensure and guarantee their authenticity
against bad faith and fraud, to prevent those who have no right
to succeed the testator will happen and win-win with the
legalization of same. Has fulfilled that purpose in the event that
there has been talk because, in the same body of the will and in
the same page where the clause witnessing appears, or the
third, expresses the will consists of three pages and that each
one of the first two has been in part the note in letters, and
partly the note in figures, they are respectively the first and
second pages of the same. These facts clearly excludes all fear,
suspicion, or shadow of a doubt that it has replaced one of its
pages with another.

Something more than in the case of Nayve against Mojal and
Aguilar (47 Phil. Rep., 160), which was clarified by the cause of
Gumban against Gorecho and other (50 Phil. Rep., 31), there is
in this case because there was no more than the notes, "p. 1";
"Page 2."; "Page 3."; and "p. 4" in the respective side of the four
pages of which it is composed, and this data is no longer
mentioned and there is also the record inserted into the first
two lines on the third page of the exhibits A and C, in that they
are composed of three pages and containing two articles and
sixteen provisions. They are therefore perfectly applicable to
the case that is what we said in the causes of Rodriguez against
Yap, RG No. 45924, May 18, 1939; and Blessed against De
Gorostiza (57 Phil. Rep., 456). We said in such causes,
respectively, the following:


"The wording of the clause witnessing this will is not
technically free repairs, but is substantially sufficient
enforcement.
We maintain the view that should be required strict compliance
with the substantive requirements of the covenant, ensure
authenticity, but at the same time we believe should not be
considered defects that do not affect this order and, on the
other part, to take into account, could thwart the will of the
testator. "(Rodrguez against Yap , supra.)

"It should not be allowed legal formalities hindering the use of
common sense in considering wills and frustrate the wishes of
the dead solemnly expressed in their wills, as to the granting of
which there is not even the shadow of bad faith or fraud ".
(Blessed against De Gorostiza, supra.)

For these reasons, finding according to law the appeal decision
of the Court of First Instance of Cebu hereby confirm it,
condemning the appellants to pay the costs. So it is ordered.