The deed of donation which is as already discussed

The Deed of Donation which is, as already discussed, one of
mortis causa, not having followed the formalities of a will , it is
void and transmitted no right to petitioners’ mother. Matilde
thus validly disposed of Lot No. 674 to respondent by her last
will and testament, subject of course to the qualification that
her (Matilde’s) will must be probated.
4. G.R. Nos. L-63253-54 April 27, 1989
PABLO RALLA, petitioner, vs.
HON. ROMULO P. UNTALAN, HON. DOMINGO CORONEL
REYES, AND LEONIE RALLA, PETER RALLA AND
MARINELLA RALLA, respondents.
FACTS:
Rosendo Ralla, a widower, filed a petition for the probate of his
own will in the then Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial
Court) of Albay, which was docketed as Special Proceedings
No. 564. In his will he left his entire estate to his son, Pablo
(the petitioner herein who, upon his death during the pendency
of this petition, was substituted by his heirs), leaving nothing to
his other son, Pedro.
In the same year, Pedro Ralla filed an action for the partition of
the estate of their mother, Paz Escarella; this was docketed as
Civil Case No. 2023. In the course of the hearing of the
probate case (Special Proceedings No. 564), Pablo Ralla filed
a motion to dismiss the petition for probate on the ground that
he was no longer interested in the allowance of the will of his
late father, Rosendo Ralla, for its probate would no longer be
beneficial 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 (Civil
Case No. 2023). On December 18, 1967, they entered into a
project of partition whereby sixty-three parcels of land,
apparently forming the estate of their deceased mother, Paz
Escarella, were amicably divided between the two of them.

R U L E 7 5 | 3
This project of partition was approved on December 19,1967
by Judge Ezekiel Grageda.
Eleven years later, or on February 28, 1978, Joaquin
Chancoco, brother-in- law of the petitioner (Pablo) filed a
petition, docketed as Special Proceedings No. 1106, for the
probate of the same will of Rosendo Ralla on the ground that
the decedent owed him P5,000.00. Pablo Ralla then filed a
manifestation stating that he had no objections to the probate;
thereafter, he filed a "Motion to Intervene as Petitioner for the
Probate of the Will." This motion was heard ex parte and
granted despite the written opposition of the heirs of Pedro
Ralla. Likewise, the petition for probate was granted.
The first argument is stated as follows:
... The extrajudicial partition of the 63 parcels made after the
filing of the petition for the probate of the Will, and before said
Will was probated, is a NULLITY, considering that as already
decided by this Court in the case of Ernesto M. Guevara, vs.
Rosario Guevara et al., Vol. 74 Phil. Reports, there can be no
valid partition among the heirs till after the Will had been
probated.