RULE 73 CASE #6 BERNARDO vs CA

G.R. No. L–18148 February 28, 1963

RULE 73 - VENUE AND PROCESS
Facts:
Capili died in 1958, testate in which he disposed his properties in favor of his wife,
cousins all surnamed Capili and Arturo, Deogracias (petitioner) and Eduardo, all
surnamed Bernardo. Reyes (wife) died the following year. Upon petition of
Deogracias Bernardo, executor of the estate of Capili, she was substituted by her
collateral relatives and intestate heirs, namely, Marcos, Vicente, Francisco and
Dominga, all surnamed Reyes; and Jose, Constancia, Raymunda and Elena, all
surnamed Isidoro. The executor filed a project of partition in the estate proceedings
in accordance with the terms of the will, adjudicating the estate of Capili among
the testamentary heirs with the exception of Reyes, whose share was allotted to her
collateral relatives. These relatives filed an opposition to the executor’s project of
partition and submitted a counter-projection of their own claiming ½ of the
properties mentioned in the will of the deceased Capili on the theory that they
belong not to the latter alone but to the conjugal partnership of the spouses.
The probate court issued an order declaring the donation void for the reason that it
falls under Article 133 of the Civil Code which prohibits donation between spouses
during the marriage. In the same order, the court disapproved both project of
partitions and directed the executor to file another, dividing the property mentioned
in the last will and testament of Capili and the properties mentioned in the deed of
donation, between the instituted heirs of Capili and Reyes, upon the basis that the
said properties were conjugal properties of the deceased spouses.

Issue:
Whether or not a probate court in a special proceeding had jurisdiction to
determine the validity of the deed of donation in question and pass upon the
question of title or ownership of the properties mentioned in the will.

Held:
The Supreme Court answered in the affirmative. The Court held that the
determination of title to property is within the jurisdiction of the Court of First
Instance. The probate court has the jurisdiction since there is a necessity to
liquidate the conjugal partnership in order to determine the estate of the decedent
which is to be distributed among heirs who are all parties to the proceedings,
including the widow, now represented because of her death, by her heirs who have
been substituted upon petition of the executor himself and who appeared
voluntarily.
The petitioners, by presenting their project of partition including therein the
disputed lands (upon the claim that they were donated by the wife to her husband)
put in question the issue of ownership of the properties is within the competence of
the probate court.