SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 226271. November 9, 2016.]
TESTATE ESTATE OF CONRADO G. POTENCIANO; MARIA VICTORIA P. VERGEL DE DIOS, REMEDIOS G. LIM, MA. YSABEL P. SYLIANTENG, AND MA. TERESA P. REYES, petitioners, vs. CONRADO P. E. POTENCIANO, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 09 November 2016 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 226271 — Testate Estate of Conrado G. Potenciano; Maria Victoria P. Vergel De Dios, Remedios G. Lim, Ma. Ysabel P. Sylianteng, and Ma. Teresa P. Reyes, petitioners, vs. Conrado P. E. Potenciano, respondent.
After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolved to DENY the instant Petition for Review on Certiorari for failure of the petitioners to show that the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 95258 committed any reversible error in affirming with modification the Orders dated May 14, 2009 and July 23, 2009 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 33, Manila City (RTC).
We uphold the finding of the RTC, as affirmed by the CA, that the heirs have not entered into an agreement relative to the alleged 65%-35% sharing ratio. It is axiomatic that the findings of fact of the trial court, especially when affirmed by the CA, are binding and conclusive on this Court. Their factual finding regarding the non-existence of such an agreement is substantially supported by the evidence on record and, for this reason, must stand.
The RTC and the CA are also correct in excluding the Sta. Mesa properties in the partition and distribution of the estate of the late Conrado G. Potenciano (decedent). The Torrens titles explicitly show that the registered owner of said properties is the late Victor R. Potenciano, who is the son of the decedent and father of herein respondent. Unless and until it has been judicially declared that said Torrens titles are invalid or that Victor R. Potenciano was a mere trustee of said properties, respondent has in his favor preponderant proof of ownership over the said Sta. Mesa properties. Moreover, it is only proper that the issue of ownership over the Sta. Mesa properties be fully threshed out in the complaint for partition, accounting and damages filed by respondent before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 22, Manila and docketed as Civil Case No. 00-99400 since the ruling of probate courts in such issues is merely provisional and not conclusive. 1 The question of ownership is an extraneous matter which the probate court cannot resolve with finality. 2
Lastly, the CA is likewise correct in holding that Irma P.E. Potenciano (Victor's widow) is entitled to participate in the distribution of the estate of the decedent. While the surviving spouse cannot claim to be a compulsory heir of his or her parent-in-law, such rule is not applicable to Irma P.E. Potenciano because she is not succeeding the decedent by right of representation, but as one of the heirs of the compulsory heirs of the decedent. As succinctly explained by the CA:
Victor R. Potenciano survived his father [the decedent], and he succeeded his father in his own right from the moment of death of the decedent on August 6, 1954. When Victor R. Potenciano himself passed away 30 years later, or in 1984, his legal heirs [including his wife Irma P.E. Potenciano] also acquired their right to succession to all the properties, right and obligations of Victor R. Potenciano at the moment of the latter's death.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolved to AFFIRM the assailed July 14, 2015 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 95258. ETHIDa
The Notice of Change of Address filed by petitioners' counsel is NOTED.
SO ORDERED. (Mendoza, J., on official leave from November 8-15, 2016 per Resolution dated January 26, 2016 in A.M. No. 07-11-02-SC under the 2016 Wellness Program)."
Very truly yours,
MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTO
Division Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Pastor, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, 207 Phil. 758, 766 (1983).
2. Id.