Yambao vs. Gonzales

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 001 9/21/21, 12:37 AM
VOL. 1, APRIL 29, 1961 1157

Yambao vs. Gonzales
No. L-10763. April 29, 19.61.
DELFIN YAMBAO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. ANGELINA

GONZALES, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
Wills; Succession; Provision interpreted; Wish of testarix upheld;

Case at bar.·The will in the case at bar contains a clear directive to
employ appellant as may be seen from the words preceding the
word "pahihintulutan", which say: "Dapat din naman malaman ng
dalawa kong taga-pagmana na sila ay may dapat tungkulin o
gangpanan gaya ng mga sumusunod." The words "dapat tungkulin
o gangpanan" mean to do or to carry out as a mandate or directive
and having reference to the word "pahihintulutan", can convey no
other meaning than to impose a duty upon the appellees. To follow
the interpretation given by the trial court would be to divest the
wish of the testatrix of its real and true meaning.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of

Laguna. Alikpala, J.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Marcial G. Mendiola for plaintiff-appellant.
Onofre P. Guevara for defendants-appellees.
BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:
This is an action filed by Delfin Yambao against Angelina

Gonzales and Maria Pablo praying that the 'latter be
1158
1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Yambao vs. Gonzales
https://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000017c0415cdda1ac93765000d00d40059004a/p/AQJ012/?username=Guest Page 1 of 4
ordered to appoint and employ him as tenant during his

lifetime on the parcels of land bequeathed to and inherited
by them from Maria Gonzales, as well as to deliver to him
the value of the harvests belonging to him as tenant of said
parcels of land. In their answer, defendants averred that
the provisions of the will relied upon by plaintiff is not
mandatory; that the determination of who should be the
tenant of the land is vested in a special court; and that the
present action is not the proper remedy.
After trial, the court dismissed the complaint for lack of
sufficient cause of action. It held that the provisions of the
will relied upon by plaintiff merely amount to a suggestion
to the defendants who, though morally bound, are not
legally compelled to follow said suggestion, invoking as
authority Article 797 of the old Civil Code. Plaintiff has
appealed,
The pertinent provisions of the will relied upon by
appellant read as follows:
"Dapat din naman malaman ng dalawa kong tagapagmana na sila

MARIA PABLO at ANGELINA GONZALES na sila ay may dapat
TUNGKULIN O GANGPANAN GAYA ng mga sumusunod:
x x x x
"(2) Pahihintulutan nila na si Delfin Yambao ang

makapagtrabajo ng bukid habang panahon, at ang nasabing bukid
ay isasailalim ng pamamahala ng Albasea samantalang ang bukid
ay nasa usapin at may utang pa."
It appears that on August 10, 1942, Maria Gonzales

executed a will bequeathing to appellees all her properties
situated in Sta. Rosa, Laguna. The will was probated in
1948. Immediately, thereafter, appellant went to appellees
to request that he be placed as tenant of the riceland
which, by an express provision of said will, they were
directed to give to him for cultivation. as tenant, and when
they refused alleging that they had already given it to
another tenant he filed the present action.
In holding that the provisions of the will relied upon by
appellant imposes only a moral but not a legal obligation,
the trial court went on to consider the import of the word
"pahihintulutan" employed with reference to appellant. In

its opinion said word only means to permit or to allow, but
1159
VOL. 1, APRIL 29, 1961 1159

Quemuel vs. Olaes
not to direct appellees to appoint appellant as tenant.

Rather, it opines, it merely contains a suggestion to employ
because the testatrix did not use the words "ipinaguutos
ko" which she used in connection with other provisions of
the will, so that there is no clear indication that it was her
intention to make such provision compulsory.
We believe, however, that the trial court has not
properly interpreted the real import of the wish of the
testatrix. Analyzing it carefully we will find that the same
contains a clear directive to employ appellant as may be
seen from the words preceding the word "pahihintulutan",
which say: "Dapat din naman malaman ng dalawa kong
tagapagmana na sila MARIA PABLO at ANGELINA
GONZALES na sila ay may dapat TUNGKULIN O
GANGPANAN GAYA ng mga sumusunod." The words
'dapat TUNGKULIN O GANGPANAN" mean to do or to
carry out as a mandate or directive, and having reference to
the word "pahihintulutan", can convey no other meaning
than to impose a duty upon appellees. To f ollow the
interpretation given by the trial court would be to devoid
the wish of the testatrix of its real and true meaning.
Article 797 of the old Civil Code, invoked by the trial
court, is inapplicable. That refers to an institution of an
heir intended to be conditional by providing that a
statement to the effect cannot be considered as a condition
unless it appears clearly that such is the intention of the
testator. We are not faced here with any conditional
institution of heirship. What we have is a clear-cut
mandate which the heirs cannot fail to carry out.
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is reversed.
Appellees are hereby ordered to employ appellant as tenant
immediately after this decision has become final. Costs
against appellees.
Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion,

Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes and Dizon, JJ., concur.
Decision reversed.
________________
© Copyright 2021 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

Yambao vs. Gonzales

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yambao vs. Gonzales

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yambao vs. Gonzales

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 001 9/21/21, 12:37 AM

VOL. 1, APRIL 29, 1961 1157

No. L-10763. April 29, 19.61.

DELFIN YAMBAO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. ANGELINA

Wills; Succession; Provision interpreted; Wish of testarix upheld;

APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of

BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:

This is an action filed by Delfin Yambao against Angelina

1158 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

ordered to appoint and employ him as tenant during his

"Dapat din naman malaman ng dalawa kong tagapagmana na sila

"(2) Pahihintulutan nila na si Delfin Yambao ang

It appears that on August 10, 1942, Maria Gonzales

"pahihintulutan" employed with reference to appellant. In

VOL. 1, APRIL 29, 1961 1159

not to direct appellees to appoint appellant as tenant.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion,

© Copyright 2021 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

You might also like