P. 1
Padaura v. Baldovino.doc

Padaura v. Baldovino.doc

|Views: 25|Likes:
Published by Na Abdurahim
Case Digest Succession
Case Digest Succession

More info:

Published by: Na Abdurahim on Nov 11, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Reservatarios DIONISIA PADURA, et. al. vs. MELANIA BALDOVINO, et. al. G.R. No. L-1196 , De!

e"#er $%, 19&' (A)*S+ Agustin Padura contracted two marriages during his lifetime. With his first wife, he had one child, Manule Padura, and with his second wife Benita padura, he had two children, Fortunato and Candelaria. Agustin died in 190 , lea!ing all of his properties to Benita and the three children. Four parcels of land were ad"uciated to Fortunato Padura. Fortunato Padura died without a will an# without an# issue, said parcels of land passed to his mother, Benita. $n 19%&, Candelaria also died, lea!ing as his onl# heirs four legitimate children, petitioners herein. 'hereafter Manuel also died, lea!ing as his onl# heirs se!en legitimate children, oppositors herein. $n 19(), Benita Padura died. 'hen the nephews and nieces of Fortunato from his full sister Candelaria and half*+rother Manuel were declared to +e the rightful reser!atarios. 'he instant petition is filed to ha!e the reser!a+le properties partitioned, such that 1,) of the same +e ad"udicated to the children of Candelaria on the +asis that the# inherit +# right of representation. 'he children of Manuel filed their opposition, maintaining that the# should all +e deemed as inheriting in their own right, and all inherit in e-ual shares. ISSUE+ Whether or not the properties +e apportioned among the nephews of the whole +lood and the nephews of the half*+lood e-uall#. ,ELD+ .o. 'he purpose of the reser!e is accomplished once the propert# has de!ol!ed to the specified relati!es in the line of origin. But from this time on, there is no further occasion for its application. $n the relations +etween one reser!atario and another of the same degree, there is no call for appl#ing Art. 91 an# longer/ wherefore, the respecti!e shares of each re!ersionar# propert# should +e go!erned +# the ordinar# rules of intestate succession. 0pon the death of the ascendant reser!ista, the reser!a+le propert# should pass, not to all reser!atarios as a class, +ut onl# to those nearest in degree to the descendant 1propositus2, e3cluding those reser!atarios of more remote degree. Pro3imit# of degree and right of representation are +asic principles of ordinar# intestate succession/ so is the rule that whole +lood +rothers and nephews are entitled to a share dou+le that of +rothers and nephews of half*+lood. 'he reser!a troncal merel# determines the group of relati!es to whom the propert# should +e returned / +ut within that group the indi!idual right of the propert# should +e decided +# the ordinar# rules of intestate succession, since Art. 91 does not specif# otherwise.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->