TESTATE ESTATE OF MARIA ZUÑIGA VDA. DE PANDO

G.R. No. L-2862, April 21, 1952

TESTATE ESTATE OF MARIA ZUÑIGA VDA. DE PANDO, DECEASED.

JUAN REYES, ADMINISTRATOR VS. DOLORES ZUÑIGA VDA. DE VIDAL, OPPOSITOR

FACTS: A petition for the probate of said will was filed in the Court of First Instance of Manila.  Dolores Zuñiga Vda. de Vidal, sister of the deceased, filed an opposition based on several grounds.  And, after several days of trial, at which both parties presented their respective evidence, the court rendered its decision disallowing the will on the ground that the signatures of the deceased appearing therein are not genuine, that it was not proven that the deceased knew the Spanish language in which it was written, and that even if the signatures are genuine, the same reveal that the deceased was not of sound mind when she signed the will. 

ISSUE: 

1) Whether or not the signatures of the deceased appearing in the will are genuine.

2) Whether or not there is evidence to show that the testatrix knew the language in which the will was written

3) Whether or not the testatrix was of sound and disposing mind when she signed the will.

RULING:

1.      YES. To prove that the will was signed by the testatrix in accordance with law, petitioner presented as witnesses the three persons who attested to the execution of the will. These witnesses testified in their own simple and natural way that the deceased signed the will seated on her bed but over a small table placed near the bed in their presence, and after she had signed it in the places where her signatures appear, they in turn signed said will in her presence and in the presence of each other.  This is the substance of what they have testified and from an examination of their testimony the court entertains no doubt that they bad told the truth. There is nothing in their testimony which may in any way reflect against their credibility nor has the oppositor proven any fact or circumstance which say give rise to the suspicion that they testified out of personal interest or pecuniary consideration.

2.      YES. There is indeed nothing in the testimony of the witnesses presented by the petitioner which would indicate that the testatrix knew and spoke the Spanish language used in the preparation of the will in question.  But, in our opinion, this failure alone does not in itself suffice to conclude that this important requirement of the law has not been complied with, it appearing that there is enough evidence on record which supplies this technical omission.  In the first place, we have an disputed fact that the deceased was a mestiza española, was carried to a Spaniard, Recaredo Pando, and made several trips to Spain. In the second place, we have the very letters submitted as evidence by the oppositer written in Spanish by the deceased in her own handwriting. These facts give rise to the presumption that the testator knew the language in which the testament has been written, which presumption should stand unless the contrary is proven.

3.      YES. These statements had not been contradicted.  They give an idea of the mental condition of the deceased while the signatures affixed by the deeeased in the will differ from each other in certain respects, this is only due to her age and state of health rather than to a defective mental condition.  They do not reveal a condition of forgery or lack of genuineness.