The Deed of Donation which is as already discussed one of mortis causa not

The deed of donation which is as already discussed

This preview shows page 2 - 4 out of 5 pages.

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.
Image of page 2
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.
Image of page 3
Image of page 4

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 5 pages?

  • Fall '19
  • Inheritance, Will, Testator, Wills and trusts, Trial court

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture