- CASE DIGEST -
Gonzales v.
CA
G.R. No.
L-37453, May 25, 1979
FACTS: Lutgarda Santiago and Rizalina
Gonzales are nieces of the late Isabel Andres Gabriel. Lutgarda filed a
petition for the probate of a will alleged to have been executed by the
deceased and designated Lutgarda as the principal beneficiary and executrix.
There is no dispute that Isabel died as a widow and without issue. The will
submitted consists of five (5) pages and includes the pages whereon the
attestation clause and the acknowledgment of the notary public were written.
The signatures of the deceased Isabel Gabriel appear at the end of the will on
page four and at the left margin of all the pages.
The petition was opposed by Rizalina assailing that the will is not
genuine and was not executed and attested as required by law; and that the
witnesses to the will were not credible. She contended that to be a credible
witness, there must be evidence on record that the witness has a good standing
in his community, or that he is honest and upright, or reputed to be
trustworthy and reliable. She further argued that the term “credible” should
have the same meaning under the Naturalization Law.
ISSUE: Whether or not there is a need to introduce
independent proof of the credibility of the witnesses.
HELD: No. Article 820 of the
Civil Code provides for the qualifications of a witness to the execution of
wills, while Article 821 sets forth the disqualifications from being a witness.
Art. 820. Any person of sound mind and of the age of
eighteen years or more, and not blind, deaf or dumb, and able to read and
write, may be a witness to the execution of a will mentioned in article 806 of
this Code.
Art. 821. The following are disqualified from being
witnesses to a will:
(1) Any person not domiciled in the Philippines;
(2) Those who have been convicted of falsification of
a document, perjury or false testimony.
Under the law,
there is no mandatory requirement that the witness testify as to his good
standing in the community, or that he is honest and upright, or reputed to be trustworthy and reliable in order that his testimony may be
believed and accepted by the trial court. It is enough
that the qualifications enumerated in Article 820 are complied with and that he
has none of the disqualifications under Article 821. Such attributes are
presumed of the witness unless the contrary is proved otherwise.
“Credible
Witness” under Naturalization Law not applicable. Under the
Naturalization Law, it is mandatory that the petition for naturalization must
be supported by two character witnesses who must prove their good standing in
the community, reputation for trustworthiness and reliableness, their honesty
and uprightness. The two witnesses in a petition for naturalization are
character witnesses.
In probate proceedings, the instrumental witnesses are not character
witnesses for they merely attest the execution of a will or testament and
affirm the formalities attendant to said execution.
In the case at bar, the finding that each and everyone of the three
instrumental witnesses, namely, Matilde Orobia, Celso Gimpaya and Maria
Gimpaya, are competent and credible is satisfactorily supported by the
evidence. For the testimony to be credible, it is not mandatory that evidence
be established on record that the witnesses have good standing in the the
community. Moreover, petitioner has not pointed to any disqualification of any
of the said witnesses, much less has it been shown that anyone of them is below
18 years of age, of unsound mind, deaf or dumb, or cannot read or write.
No comments:
Post a Comment