Mitra vs. Sablan-Guevarra, G.R. No. 213994, April 18, 2018 [Case Digest]

 

Mitra vs. Sablan-Guevarra,

G.R. No. 213994, April 18, 2018

Second Division [REYES, JR., J.:]

Facts:

            On June 26, 2006, Margie Santos Mitra (petitioner) filed a petition for the probate of the notarial will of Remedios Legaspi with prayer for issuance of letters testamentary before the RTC. It was alleged that the petitioner is the de facto adopted daughter of Legaspi; that Legaspi, single, died on December 22, 2004 in Caloocan City; that Legaspi left a notarial will, instituting the petitioner, Orlando Castro, Perpetua Sablan Guevarra, and Remigio Legaspi Sablan, as her heirs, legatees and devisees; that Legaspi left real and personal properties with the approximate total value of P1,032,237.00 and that Legaspi named Mary Ann Castro as the executor of the will.

            Perpetua L. Sablan-Guevarra and Remegio L. Sablan (respondents), who claim to be Legaspi's legal heirs, opposed the petition. They aver that the will was not executed in accordance with the formalities required by law; that since the last page of the will, which contained the Acknowledgement, was not signed by Legaspi and her instrumental witnesses, the will should be declared invalid; that the attestation clause failed to state the number of pages upon which the will was written; and that the will was executed under undue and improper pressure, thus, Legaspi could not have intended the document to be her last will and testament.

            RTC admit the will of Legaspi. The probate court explained that the last page of the will is but a mere continuation of the Acknowledgement portion, which the testator and the witnesses are not required to sign. Also, it held that inasmuch as the number of pages upon which the will was written was stated in the Acknowledgement, the will must be admitted to probate. The respondents' allegation of undue influence or improper pressure exerted upon Legaspi was disregarded for failure on their part to adduce evidence proving the existence thereof.

            CA reversed the judgment of the RTC, as the CA adhered to the view of strictly complying with the requirement of stating the number of pages of the will in the attestation clause. Moreover, the CA detected another supposed fatal defect in the will: the photocopy of the will submitted by the respondents on appeal did not contain the signatures of the instrumental witnesses on each and every page thereof.

            The petitioner, in assailing the findings of the CA, argues that in the original copy of the will that was offered before the probate court as Exhibit "L," it is clear that the instrumental witnesses signed on the left margin of every page of the will except the last, as did Legaspi.  The petitioner advances that the confusion arose when the respondents, in their record of appeal, submitted an altered photocopy of the will to the CA, in which the signatures of the instrumental witnesses were covered when photocopied, to make it appear that the witnesses did not sign on every page. This misled the CA to rule that the will was defective for the lack of signatures.

 

Issue 1:

            Whether the CA erred in finding that the instrumental witnesses to the will failed to sign on each and every page thereof on the left margin, except the last, as required under Article 805 of the Civil Code.

 

Held:

            Yes; it is uncontested and can be readily gleaned that the instrumental witnesses signed on each and every page of the will, except the last page. Such being the case, the CA erred in concluding otherwise. There is no doubt that the requirement under the Article 805 of the Civil Code, which calls for the signature of the testator and of the instrumental witnesses on each and every page of the will on the left margin, except the last, was complied with.

            It should also be mentioned that the respondents take a skewed stance in insisting that the testator Legaspi and the instrumental witnesses should have signed on the last page of the subject will. When Article 805 of the Civil Code requires the testator to subscribe at the end of the will, it necessarily refers to the logical end thereof, which is where the last testamentary disposition ends. As the probate court correctly appreciated, the last page of the will does not contain any testamentary disposition; it is but a mere continuation of the Acknowledgment.

 

Issue 2:

            Whether the CA erred in ruling that the failure to state the number of pages comprising the will on the attestation clause renders such will defective.

 

Held:

            Yes; in Singson vs. Florentino, the Court adopted a more liberal approach and allowed probate, even if the number of pages of the will was mentioned in the last part of the body of the will and not in the attestation clause. This is to prevent the will of the testator from being defeated by purely technical considerations.

            The substantial compliance rule is embodied in the Civil Code as Article 809 thereof, which provides that: Article 809. In the absence of bad faith, forgery, or fraud, or undue and improper pressure and influence, defects and imperfections in the form of attestation or in the language used therein shall not render the will invalid if it is proved that the will was in fact executed and attested in substantial compliance with all the requirements of Article 805.

            Thus, in Taboada vs. Hon. Rosal, the Court allowed the probate of a will notwithstanding that the number of pages was stated not in the attestation clause, but in the Acknowledgment. In Azuela vs. CA, the Court ruled that there is substantial compliance with the requirement, if it is stated elsewhere in the will how many pages it is comprised of.

            What is imperative for the allowance of a will despite the existence of omissions is that such omissions must be supplied by an examination of the will itself, without the need of resorting to extrinsic evidence. "However, those omissions which cannot be supplied except by evidence aliunde would result in the invalidation of the attestation clause and ultimately, of the will itself."

            An examination of the will in question reveals that the attestation clause indeed failed to state the number of pages comprising the will. However, as was the situation in Taboada, this omission was supplied in the Acknowledgment. It was specified therein that the will is composed of four pages, the Acknowledgment included. As with the will, the Acknowledgment is written in Filipino, quoted in part below: Ang HULING HABILlNG ito ay binubuo ng apat (4) na dahon, kasama ang dahong kinaroroonan ng Pagpapatunay at Pagpapatotoong ito.

            In sum, Legaspi's last will and testament has substantially complied with all the formalities required of a notarial will. It has been proven that Legaspi and the instrumental witnesses signed on every page of the will, except on the last, which refers to the Acknowledgment page. With regard to the omission of the number of pages in the attestation clause, this was supplied by the Acknowledgment portion of the will itself without the need to resort to extrinsic evidence. Contrary to the CA conclusion, such omission does not in any way serve as hindrance to probate.