T
cw
H
oT
DY YIENG SEANGIO, BARBARA D. SEANGIO and VIRGINIA D. SEANGIO,
Petitioners,
oroei
vs.
HON. AMOR A. REYES, in her capacity as Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court,
National Capital Judicial Region, Branch 21, Manila, ALFREDO D. SEANGIO,
ALBERTO D. SEANGIO, ELISA D. SEANGIO-SANTOS, VICTOR D. SEANGIO,
ntaia
ALFONSO D. SEANGIO, SHIRLEY D. SEANGIO-LIM, BETTY D. SEANGIO-OBAS and
JAMES D. SEANGIO, Respondents.
ctnlm
v
G.R. Nos. 140371-72 November 27, 2006
FACTS:
erlm
o
The case involved a petition for the probate of an alleged holographic will
denominated as “Kasulatan sa pag-aalis ng mana.” The petitioners sought to
,asoow
nullify the orders of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 21, which
dismissed the petition for probate due to preterition. The case was consolidated
under two proceedings: SP. Proc. No. 98-90870 (“In the Matter of the Intestate
vsw
Estate of Segundo C. Seangio v. Alfredo D. Seangio, et al.”) and SP. Proc. No. 99-
r-t
93396 (“In the Matter of the Probate of the Will of Segundo C. Seangio v. Dy Yieng
Seangio, Barbara D. Seangio, and Virginia Seangio”).
eaht
On September 21, 1988, private respondents filed a petition for the
settlement of the intestate estate of the late Segundo Seangio. They requested
the appointment of private respondent Elisa D. Seangio-Santos as special
administrator and guardian ad litem for petitioner Dy Yieng Seangio.
nslT
eh
The petitioners Dy Yieng, Barbara, and Virginia (all surnamed Seangio)
opposed the petition. They argued that Dy Yieng was still healthy and mentally
t,oe
competent. They also asserted that Segundo had executed a general power of
attorney in favor of Virginia, granting her authority over his business in the
al
Philippines. Furthermore, they claimed that Virginia, a certified public accountant,
was the most qualified to serve as the estate administrator. They also presented
iw
Segundo’s holographic will, dated September 20, 1995, which disinherited one of
the private respondents, Alfredo Seangio, for cause.
ran
In light of the purported holographic will, petitioners contended that if the
oao
decedent indeed left a will, the intestate proceedings should be automatically
suspended, replaced by probate proceedings.
o
rw
The document referred to as Segundo’s holographic will reads as follows:
ndu
atw
nao
“Kasulatan sa pag-aalis ng mana
Tantunin ng sinuman
Ako si Segundo Seangio, Filipino, may asawa, naninirahan sa 465-A
Flores St., Ermita, Manila, at nagtatalay ng maiwanag na pag-iisip at
disposisyon. Ay tahasan at hayagang inaalisan ko ng lahat at anumang
mana ang paganay kong anak na si Alfredo Seangio dahil siya ay
naging lapastangan sa akin at isang beses siyang nagsalita ng masama
harap ko at mga kapatid niya na si Virginia Seangio. Labiskong
kinasama ng loob ko at sasabihin rin ni Alfredo sa akin na ako nasa
ibabaw, gayon, darating ang araw na ako nasa ilalim, siya nasa
iababaw.”
ISSUE:
Whether or not the document executed by Segundo can be considered as a
holographic will.
RULING:
The Court grant the petition, the trial court, therefore, should have allowed
the holographic will to be probated. It is settled that testate proceedings for the
settlement of the estate of the decedent take precedence over intestate
proceedings for the same purpose
A holographic will, as provided under Article 810 of the Civil Code, must be
entirely written, dated, and signed by the hand of the testator himself. It is subject
to no other form, and may be made in or out of the Philippines, and need not be
witnessed.
The document, although it may initially come across as a mere
disinheritance instrument, conforms to the formalities of a holographic will
prescribed by law. It is written, dated and signed by the hand of the testator
himself. An intent to dispose mortis causa (Article 783) can be clearly deduced
from the terms of the instrument, and while it does not make an affirmative
disposition of the latter’s property, the disinheritance of the son nonetheless, is an
act of disposition in itself. In other words, the disinheritance results in the
disposition of the property of the testator in favor of those who would succeed in
the absence of the eldest son.
Moreover, it is a fundamental principle that the intent or the will of the
testator, expressed in the form and within the limits prescribed by law, must be
recognized as the supreme law in succession. All rules of construction are
designed to ascertain and give effect to that intention. It is only when the
intention of the testator is contrary to law, morals, or public policy that it cannot
be given effect.
Holographic wills, therefore, being usually prepared by one who is not
learned in the law should be construed more liberally than the ones drawn by an
expert, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the execution of the
instrument and the intention of the testator. In this regard, the document, even if
captioned as Kasulatan ng Pag-alis ng Mana, was intended by the testator to be
his last testamentary act and was executed by him in accordance with law in the
form of a holographic will. Unless the will is probated, the disinheritance cannot
be given effect.
