G.R. No. L-13431 November 12, 1919
In re will of Ana Abangan.
GERTRUDIS ABANGAN, executrix-appellee,
vs.
ANASTACIA ABANGAN, ET AL., opponents-appellants.
FACTS:
Ana Abangan’s will was admitted to probate. Opponents
appealed. Ana’s will consisted of two sheets. The first contained all the
dispositions duly signed at the bottom bottom by Martin Montalban (in the name and under the direction of the
testatrix) and by three witnesses. The following sheet contains only the
attestation clause duly signed at the bottom by the three instrumental
witnesses. Neither of these sheets is signed on the left margin by the
testatrix and the three witnesses, nor numbered by letters; and these
omissions, according to appellants’ contention, are defects whereby the probate
of the will should have been denied.
ISSUES:
1. WON the probate of the will should have been denied
because neither of the two sheets were signed on the left margin by the
testatrix and the three witnesses, nor numbered by letters.
2. WON the testatrix knew the language in which the will was
written.
RULING:
1.) NO. The will was duly admitted to probate. According to
the SC:
ATTESTATION. — In a will consisting of two sheets the first of which contains all the testamentary dispositions and is signed at the bottom by the testator and three witnesses and the second contains only the attestation clause and is signed also at the bottom by the three witnesses, it is not necessary that both sheets be further signed on their margins by the testator and the witnesses, or be paged.
TESTATOR’S SIGNATURE.
— The testator’s signature is not necessary in the attestation clause because
this, as its name implies, appertains only to the witnesses.
The SC emphasized that the object of the
solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to close the door against bad faith and
fraud, to avoid substitution of wills and testaments and to guaranty their
truth and authenticity. Therefore the laws on this subject should be
interpreted in such a way as to attain these primordial ends. But, on the other
hand, also one must not lose sight of the fact that it is not the object of the
law to restrain and curtail the exercise of the right to make a will. So when
an interpretation already given assures such ends, any other interpretation
whatsoever, that adds nothing but demands more requisites entirely unnecessary,
useless and frustrative of the testator’s last will, must be disregarded.
2.) Yes. The testatrix knew the language in which the will was written.
DIALECT IN WHICH WRITTEN; PRESUMPTION. — The circumstance
appearing in the will itself that same was executed in the city of Cebu and in the dialect of this locality where
the testatrix was a neighbor is enough, in the absence of any proof to
the contrary, to presume that she knew this dialect in which her will is
written.
The judgment appealed from was affirmed.
0 yorum:
Post a Comment
Thank you so much for visiting. God bless you and your family always.