ASTILLO, VIRGIL MARI L.

August 9, 2021
Bondad v. Bondad, GR L-8092

FACTS OF THE CASE:

The plaintiff, Rufina Bondad, had two brothers and sisters and on May 6, 1911,
brought suit against her brothers and sisters, and even the nephews to secure the
partition on the property left to these defendants by their father or grandfather,
respectively, Crisanto Bondad upon his untimely death on March 17, 1902. She
designates the said lands to be divided.
ISSUE OF THE CASE:
Whether or not the plaintiff, Rufina Bondad is entitled to a partition of the
defendant’s property that was left by their predecessors upon their death.
RULING:
No
RATION DECIDENDI:
As clearly stated under the provisions of the Civil Code of the Philippines, articles
657 to 661, that the rights to succession of a person are transmitted from the moment of
his death, meaning that the heirs succeed immediately to all of the properties of the
deceased ancestor. The property solely belongs to the heirs at the moment of the death
of the ancestor as completely as if the ancestor had executed and delivered to them a
deed for the same before his death. The Code of Procedure in Civil Actions provides
how an estate may be divided by a petition for partition in case they cannot mutually
agree in the division. The property belonging to the heirs, in the absence of existing
debts against the estate, the administrator has no right whatever to intervene in any way
in the division of the estate among the heirs. The plaintiff already received her part of
the property which was the one the plaintiff had 200 coconut trees under the land and
have possessed it for 10 years.