No. L-13876.

 February 28, 1962.

CONSOLACION FLORENTINO DE CRISOLOGO, ET AL.,
plaintiffs-appellees, vs. DR. MANUEL SINGSON, defendant-appellant.
Wills and testaments; Designation of heirs; Purpose of fideicommissary
substitution.—It is of the essence of a fideicommissary substitution that an
obligation be clearly imposed upon the first heir to preserve and transmit to another
the whole or part of the estate bequeathed to him, upon his death or upon the
happening of a particular event.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur.
Antonio, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
     Felix V. Vergara for defendant-appellant.
     B. Martinez for plaintiffs-appellees.
DIZON, J,:

Action for partition commenced by the spouses Consolacion Florentino

and Francisco Crisologo against Manuel Singson in connection with a
residential lot located at Plaridel St., Vigan, Ilocos Sur, with an area of
approximately 193 square meters, and the improvements existing
thereon, covered by Tax No. 10765-C. Their complaint alleged that
Singson owned one-half pro-indiviso of said property and that
Consolacion Florentino owned the other half by virtue of the provisions
of the duly probated last will of Dña. Leona Singson, the original owner,
and the project of partition submitted to, and approved by the Court of
First Instance of Ilocos Sur in special Proceeding No. 453; that plaintiffs
had made demands for the partition of said property, but defendant
refused to accede thereto, thus compelling them to bring action.
Defendant's defense was that Consolacion Florentino was a mere
usufructuary of, and not owner of one-half pro-indiviso of the property
in question, and that, therefore, she was not entitled to demand partition
thereof.
After trial upon the issue thus posed, the lower court rendered
judgment as follows:
 1 '1.Declaring that the plaintiff is a co-owner pro-indiviso with the
defendant of the house and lot described in the complaint to the
extent of each of an undivided 1/2 portion thereof;
2 "2.Ordering the aforesaid co-owners to execute an agreement of
partition of the said property within 30 days from receipt of this
judgment unless it be shown that the division thereof may render it
unserviceable, in which case the provisions of Art. 498 of the New
Civil Code may be applied;
3 "3.That in the event the said parties shall fail to do so, this Court will
appoint the corresponding commissioners to make the partition in
accordance with law; and
4 "4.Without special pronouncement as to costs."
From the above judgment, defendant Singson appealed.
It is admitted that Dña. Leona Singson, who died single on January
13, 1948, was the owner of the property in question at the time of her
death. On July 31, 1951 she executed her last will which was admitted to
probate in Special Proceeding No. 453 of the lower court whose decision
was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in G.R. No. 3605-R. At the time
of the execution of the will, her nearest living relatives were her brothers
Evaristo, Manuel and Dionisio Singson, her nieces Rosario, Emilia and
Trinidad, and her grandniece Consolacion, all surnamed Florentino.
Clause IX of her last will reads as follows:
"NOVENO.—Ordeno que se de a mi nieta por parte de mi hermana mia y que al
mismo tiempo vive en mi casa, y, por tanto, bajo mi proteccion, y es la
CONSOLACION FLORENTINO:—
"(A). La mitad de mi casa de materiales fuertes con techo de hierro galvanizado,
incluyendo la mitad de su solar, ubicado en la Poblacion de Vigan, Ilocos Sur, Calle
Plaridel, actualmente arrendada por los hermanos Fortunato, Teofilo y Pedro del
appellido Kairuz. Pero si falleciere antes o despues que yo mi citada nieta, esta propiedad
se dara por partes iguales entre mis tres hermanos Evaristo, Manuel y Dionisio, o a sus
herederos forzosos en el caso de que alguno de ellas muriere antes, x x x (Exhibit F.)"
The issue to be decided is whether the testamentary disposition above-
quoted provided for what is called sustitucion vulgar or for a sustitucion
fideicomisaria. This issue is, we believe, controlled by the pertinent
provisions of the Civil Code in force in the Philippines prior to the
effectivity of the New Civil Code, in view of the fact that the testatrix
died on January 13, 1948. They are the following:
"Art. 774. The testator may designate one or more persons to substitute the heir or
heirs instituted in case such heir or heirs should die before him, or should not wish
or should be unable to accept the inheritance.
"A simple substitution, without a statement of the cases to which it is to apply,
shall include the three mentioned in the next preceeding paragraph, unless the
testator has otherwise provided:"
"Art. 781. Fidei-commissary substitutions by virtue of which the heir is charged to
preserve and transmit to a third person the whole or part of the inheritance shall be
valid and effective, provided they do not go beyond the second degree, or that they
are made in favor of persons living at the time of the death of the testator."
"Art. 785. The following shall be inoperative:
1. Fiduciary substitutions not made expressly, either by giving them this name
or by imposing upon the fiduciary the absolute obligation of delivering the
property to a second heir." x x x.
In accordance with the first legal provision quoted above, the testator
may not only designate the heirs who will succeeed him upon his death,
but also provide for substitutes in the event that said heirs do not accept
or are in no position to accept the inheritance or legacies, or die ahead of
him.
The testator may also bequeath his properties to a particular person
with the obligation, on the part of the latter, to deliver the same to
another person, totally or partially, upon the occurrence of a particular
event (6 Manresa, p. 1112).
It is clear that the particular testamentary clause under consideration
provides for a substitution of the heir named therein in this manner: that
upon the death of Consolacion Florentino—whether this occurs before
or after that of the testatrix—the property bequeathed to her shall be
delivered ("se dara") or shall belong in equal parts to the testatrix's three
brothers, Evaristo, Manuel and Dionisio, or their forced heirs, should
anyone of them die ahead of Consolacion Florentino. If this clause
created what is known as sustitucion vulgar, the necessary result would
be that Consolacion Florentino, upon the death of the testatrix, became
the owner of one undivided half of the property, but if it provided for
a sustitution fideicomisaria, she would have acquired nothing more than
usufructuary rights over the same half. In the former case, she would
undoubtedly be entitled to partition, but not in the latter. As Manresa
says, if the fiduciary did not acquire full ownership of the property
bequeathed by will, but mere usufructuary rights thereon until the time
came for him to deliver said property to the fideicomisario, it is obvious
that the nude ownership over the property, upon the death of the
testatrix, passed to and was acquired by another person, and the person
cannot be other than the fideicomisario (6 Manresa, p. 145).
It seems to be of the essence of a fideicommissary substitution that an
obligation be clearly imposed upon the first heir to preserve and transmit
to another the whole or part of the estate bequeathed to him, upon his
death or upon the happening of a particular event. For this reason, Art.
785 of the old Civil Code provides that a fideicommissary substitution
shall have no effect unless it is made expressly (de una manera expresa")
either by giving it such name, or by imposing upon the first heir the
absolute obligation ("obligacion terminante") to deliver the inheritance
to a substitute or second heir. In this connection Manresa says:
"Para que la sustitucion sea fideicomisaria, es preciso segun el art. 781, que se
ordeno to encargue al primer heredero cuando sea tal, que conserve y, transmita a
una tercera pesona to entidad el todo a parte de la herencia. O. lo que es lo mismo,
la sustitucion fideicomisaria, como declaran las resoluciones de 25 de Junio de
1895, 10 de Febrero de 1899 y 19 de Julio de 1909, exige tres requisitos:
1 "1.oUn primer heredero llamado al goce de los bienes preferentemente.
2 "2.oObligacion claramente impuesta al mismo de conservar y, transmitir a un
tercero el todo to parte del caudal.
3 "3.oUn segundo heredero.
"A estos requisitos añade la sentencia de 18 de Noviembre de 1918, otro mas, el
del que el fideicomisario tenga derecho a los bienes de la herencia desde el
momento de la muerte del testador, puesto que ha de suceder a este y , no al
fiduciar
"Por tanto, cuando el causante se limita a instituir dos herederos, y por
fallecimiento de ambos to de cualquiera de ellos, asigna la parte del fallecido o
fallecidos, a los herederos legitimos o a otras personas, solo existe una sustitucion
vulgar, porque falta el requisito de haberse impuesto a los primeros herederos la
obligacion de conservar y , transmitir los bienes, y el articulo 789, en su parrafo
primero, evige que la sustitucion sea expresa, ya dandole el testador el nombre de
sustitucion fideicomisaria, ya imponiendo al sustituido la obligacion terminante de
conservar y transmitir los bienes a un segundo heredero."
A careful perusal of the testamentary clause under consideration shows
that the substitution of heirs provided for therein is not expressly made
of the of fideicommissa kind, nor does it contain a clear statement to the
effect that appellee, during her lifetime, shall only enjoy usufructuary
rights over the property bequeathed to her, naked ownership thereof
being vested in the brothers of the testatrix. As already stated, it merely
provides that upon appellee's death—whether this happens before or
after that of the testatrix—her share shall belong to the brothers of the
testatrix.
In the light of the foregoing, we believe, and so hold, that the last will
of the deceased Dña. Leona Singson, established a mere sustitucion
vulgar, the substitution Consolacion Florentino by the brothers of the
testatrix to be effective or to take place upon the death of the former,
whether it happens before or after that of the testatrix.
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the appealed judgment is
affirmed, with costs.
     Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista
Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes and De
Leon, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed.
______________
© Copyright 2022 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.