LAW ON SUCCESSION | CHINGEN VS. ARGUELLES, G.R. NO. L-3314, JANUARY 3, 1907
CHINGEN VS. ARGUELLES,
G.R.
NO. L-3314, JANUARY 3, 1907
TOPIC/DOCTRINE
The
right of usufruct in the estate of a deceased spouse to which the surviving
widower is entitled, who is in addition an heir under the will of his deceased
wife, is not superior and he is not entitled to greater privileges than other
coheirs, because the object of the law is to equalize the condition of the
heirs and that of the surviving spouse with the right of usufruct.
FACTS
Tomas Arguelles and wife, e al.,are Legatees of
Raymunda Reyes. In her will, Raymunda left in their favor the following
legacies: house numbered 8, 10, 12, and 14 Calle Claviera, district of
Binondo, two combs set with diamonds and
pearls, gold ring with three diamonds each, gold ring with one large and
several diamonds.
Anselmo Chingen, Surviving spouse of Raymunda Reyes, filed a complaint against
Arguelles and wife, et al. for one-half of the jewels and the rent of the
property mentioned in the said complaint equivalent to 4,170 pesos, or a half of 8,340 pesos
received by the Arguelles and wife et al. since the date they took possession
of the legacies left by the deceased Raymunda Reyes in her will who died without
legitimate heirs, ascendants or descendants.
Article 837 of the Civil Code provides:
"If the testator should have neither legitimate ascendants or descendants,
the surviving spouse shall be entitled to one half of the estate also in
usufruct."
Chingen is an heir under the will of Raymunda. He
claims that his wife gave him a portion of her estate as an heir. However, his
wife failed to assign to him in her will the entire portion which belonged to
him; that is to say, one half of the estate in usufruct. He claims half of the
jewels bequeathed to the legatees, and one half of the rents accruing from a
certain house also bequeathed to the defendants, as his usufructory portion.
ISSUE
Whether Chingen should received his share as an heir
under the will from one half of the estate and be further entitled to the
usufruct of the other half.
RULING
No.
The court ruled that t he right of usufruct in the estate of a
deceased spouse to which the surviving widower is entitled, who is in addition
an heir under the will of his deceased wife, is not superior and he is not
entitled to greater privileges than other coheirs, because the object of the
law is to equalize the condition of the heirs and that of the surviving spouse
with the right of usufruct. The usufructuary right in one-half of the
estate of a deceased person who leaves neither legitimate ascendants nor
descendants is extinguished ipso facto by the merger of such usufructuary right
and ownership in one person whom concur the status of widower and heir. (Art.
513, par. 3, Civil Code.) The widower who receives his share as an heir
under the will from one-half of the estate of his deceased wife, without
legitimate ascendants or descendants, has no right to enjoy the usufruct of the
other half of the property to the prejudice of his coheirs and the various
legatees under the will.