The Deed of Donation which is, as already discussed, one ofmortis causa, not having followed the formalities of a will, it isvoid and transmitted no right to petitioners’ mother. Matildethus validly disposed of Lot No. 674 to respondent by her lastwill and testament, subject of course to the qualification thather (Matilde’s) will must be probated.4. G.R. Nos. L-63253-54 April 27, 1989PABLORALLA, petitioner, vs.HON. ROMULO P. UNTALAN, HON. DOMINGO CORONELREYES, AND LEONIE RALLA, PETER RALLA ANDMARINELLA RALLA, respondents.FACTS:Rosendo Ralla, a widower, filed a petition for the probate of hisown will in the then Court of First Instance (now Regional TrialCourt) of Albay, which was docketed as Special ProceedingsNo. 564. In his will he left his entire estate to his son, Pablo(the petitioner herein who, upon his death during the pendencyof this petition, was substituted by his heirs), leaving nothing tohis other son, Pedro.In the same year, Pedro Ralla filed an action for the partition ofthe estate of their mother, Paz Escarella; this was docketed asCivil Case No. 2023. In the course of the hearing of theprobate case (Special Proceedings No. 564), Pablo Ralla fileda motion to dismiss the petition for probate on the ground thathe was no longer interested in the allowance of the will of hislate father, Rosendo Ralla, for its probate would no longer bebeneficial and advantageous to him. This motion was denied,and the denial was denied by the Court of Appeals. Meanwhile,the brothers agreed to compromise in the partition case (CivilCase No. 2023). On December 18, 1967, they entered into aproject of partition whereby sixty-three parcels of land,apparently forming the estate of their deceased mother, PazEscarella, were amicably divided between the two of them.
R U L E 7 5 | 3This project of partition was approved on December 19,1967by Judge Ezekiel Grageda.Eleven years later, or on February 28, 1978, JoaquinChancoco, brother-in- law of the petitioner (Pablo) filed apetition, docketed as Special Proceedings No. 1106, for theprobate of the same will of Rosendo Ralla on the ground thatthe decedent owed him P5,000.00. Pablo Ralla then filed amanifestation stating that he had no objections to the probate;thereafter, he filed a "Motion to Intervene as Petitioner for theProbate of the Will." This motion was heard ex parte andgranted despite the written opposition of the heirs of PedroRalla. Likewise, the petition for probate was granted.The first argument is stated as follows:... The extrajudicial partition of the 63 parcels made after thefiling of the petition for the probate of the Will, and before saidWill was probated, is a NULLITY, considering that as alreadydecided by this Court in the case of Ernesto M. Guevara, vs.Rosario Guevara et al., Vol. 74 Phil. Reports, there can be novalid partition among the heirs till after the Will had beenprobated.