● The record shows, the executor appointed in the will, Pedro Unson,

In re will of Josefa Zalamea y Abella, deceased. who then filed in the court of First Instance of Laguna on the 19th
PEDRO UNSON, petitioner-appellee, of January of the same year an application for the probate of the
vs. will and the issuance of the proper letters of administration in his
ANTONIO ABELLA, ET AL., opponents-appellants. favor.
12 June 1922 | VILLAMOR, J.| Article 827
● The application was opposed by Antonio Abella, Ignacia Abella,
PETITIONER: Pedro Unson Avicencia Abella, and Santiago Vito, alleging among others There
RESPONDENTS: Antonio Abella, et al. is no attestation clause in the inventory attached to the will; that it
was not signed by the testatrix and the witnesses in the presence of
SUMMARY: each other; and its paging was made in Arabic numerals and not in
Doña Josefa Zalamea y Abella, executed her last will and testament letters.
with an attached inventory of her properties, in the presence of
three witnesses, who signed with her all the pages of said ● Trial court rejected the opposition and ordered the probate of the
documents. The testatrix died and a certain Pedro Unson, filed an will and the inventory, holding that both documents contained the
application for the probate of the will and the issuance of the proper true and last will of the deceased Josefa Zalamea.
letters of administration in his favor.

The court held that when an interpretation that adds nothing but Issue: Whether or not the will is valid? (YES)
demands more requisites entirely unnecessary, useless, and
frustrative of the testator’s last will, it must be disregarded. Ruling:

● The court held in the affirmative.

Therefore, the oppositions made simply based on paging and that
absence of attestation in the inventory attached to the will is nothing ● As to the paging of the will, the SC cited the case of Aldaba v.
but useless and frustrative. More importantly, these do not render Roque. Thus: It was ruled that this way of numbering the
the testament invalid. pages of a will is in accordance with the spirit of the law ,
inasmuch as either one of these methods indicates the
DOCTRINE: correlation of the pages and serves to prevent the abstraction
The object of the solemnities surrounding the execution of wills is to of any of them. In the course of the decision, we said: "It
close the door against bad faith and fraud, to avoid substitution of might be said that the object of the law in requiring that the
wills and testaments and to guarantee their truth and authenticity. paging be made in letters is to make falsification more
difficult, but it should be noted that since all the pages of the
Facts: testament are signed at the margin by the testatrix and the
● Doña Josefa Zalamea y Abella, single, 60 years old, executed her witnesses, the difficulty of forging the signatures in either case
last will and testament with an attached inventory of her properties, remains the same. In other words the more or less degree of
in the presence of three witnesses, who signed with her all the facility to imitate the writing of the letters A, B, C, etc., does
pages of said documents. not make for the ease to forge the signatures.

● The testatrix died on the 6th of January, 1921.

 ● The inventory is referred to in the will as an “integral part” of it ● In the aforementioned cases, the will may be admitted to
so the inventory need not have an additional attestation clause probate without the testimony of said witness, if, upon the
at the end. other proofs adduced in the case, the court is satisfied that the
will has been duly executed.
● The actuation of the proponents in NOT bringing to court
Pedro de Jesus does not render the will invalid. ● But supposing that de Jesus, when cited, had testified adversely
to the application, this would not by itself have change the
● According to a decision of the court, the general rule is that, result reached by the court a quo, for section 632 of the Code
where opposition is made to the probate of a will, the of Civil Procedure provides that a will can be admitted to
attesting witnesses must be produced. probate, notwithstanding that one or more witnesses do not
● But there are exceptions: when a witness is dead, or cannot remember having attested it, provided the court is satisfied
be served with process of the court, or his reputation for upon the evidence adduced that the will has been executed and
truth has been questioned or he appears hostile to the cause signed in the manner prescribed by the law.
of the proponent. In such cases, the will may be admitted to
probate without the testimony of said witness, if upon the other
proofs, the court is satisfied that the will has been duly
executed.
TESTATE ESTATE OF THE LATE ADRIANA MALOTO, the others, and the assignment of devises and legatees to
ALDINA MALOTO CASIANO, CONSTANCIO MALOTO,
other parties. The SC remanded it to the lower court and seek
PURIFICACION MIRAFLOR, ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH
OF MOLO, AND ASILO DE MOLO, petitioners, vs. COURT OF its validity in a probate court. During the probate, the maid
APPEALS, PANFILO MALOTO AND FELINO MALOTO, Guadalupe (of Adriana) claims to have burned the will at
respondents. Adriana’s will, thereby validly revoking it in accordance
with the law.
29 February 1988 | Sarmiento, J. | Inheritance

SUMMARY: After having discrepancies in the settlement of

The SC held that there was no establishment of animus
the estate of the deceased Adriana Maloto (who was then
revocandi on the part of the testatrix, and neither was the
thought to not have not left any will), the four heirs executed
burning proven to be done under the express direction of
an extrajudicial settlement of her estate which was denied by
Adriana nor was it established to be burned in her presence.
the court. During the pendency of the proceedings, a certain
As such, the will was not revoked and the will remains to be
Atty. Palma discovered what was purportedly a will and
valid.
testament executed by the testatrix Adriana herself: found in
the cabinet of Adriana’s former counsel, Atty Hervas. DOCTRINE: One of the ways to revoke a will under Article
830 of the Civil Code is by burning, tearing, cancelling, or
The questioning of the probate of this will prompted the heirs
obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it by the
to take it to the Supreme Court because of the favor given to
testator himself, or by some other person in his presence, any
 certain Guadalupe de Coral, upon instructions of the testatrix
by his express direction. This must be attended with animus
revocandi. herself, and the court ruled that the will had been revoked. On
appeal, the appellate court found that there was no sufficient
proof of animus revocandi hence the will must remain valid.
ISSUE: Whether the will was validly revoked by the testator Adriana
FACTS:
● The niece and nephews are the heirs left of the deceased
Adriana Maloto when she died. The petitioners herein are RULING: No. According to Article 830 of the Civil Code. No will
Aldina Maloto-Casiano and Constancio Maloto, while the shall be revoked except: x x x (3) By burning, tearing, cancelling, or
respondents are Felino and Panfilo, both surnamed Maloto. The obliterating the will with the intention of revoking it, by the testator
four heirs initially went to court for the settlement of their himself, or by some other person in his presence, and by his express
aunt’s estate, because they believed that Adriana did not direction. If burned, torn, or cancelled, or obliterated by some other
execute any last will or testament. While the case was pending, person, without the express direction of the testator, the will may still
be established, and the estate distributed in accordance therewith, if its
the four heirs executed an agreement of extrajudicial settlement
contents and due execution and the fact of its unauthorized destruction,
providing for the division of the estate into four equal parts.
cancellation, or obliteration are established according to the Rules of
However, the Court did not approve it
Court.
● About three years after, a certain Atty. Sulpicio Palma, a
former associate of Adriana’s counsel discovered a document From this provision, it appears that the physical act of
entitled “Katapusan Nga Pagbubulat-an (Testamento) and destroying the will (in this case, burning it) does not per se constitute
claimed it to be the last will and testament of the deceased an effective revocation, unless the destruction of the will is couple
Adriana. Palma further claims to have found it as an original with animus revocandi on the part of the testate. It also appears that
the destruction is not done by the testator himself/herself, it may be
copy when he was rummaging through some objects inside the
done at his/her express direction.
cabinet of Atty Hervas.
● In the said will, Aldina and Constancio are bestowed with a
larger and more valuable portion compared to the other heirs
For an effective revocation to be executed, the necessity of
Panfilo and Felino. The wills also gives devises and legacies to animus revocandi is required. In other words, the intention to revoke
other named parties. must accompany the over physical act of destruction of the will carried
● The trial court denied their motion. out by the testator or another through the testator’s express direction.
● The petitioners then went to the Supreme Court to plead their In this case, there is a lack of evidence to show compliance with these
case only to be dismissed and be told by the Court to initiate a statutory requirements. The documents purportedly burned by the
separate proceeding for the probat of this newly discovered maid Guadalupe was not sufficiently established to be a will, neither
will. was ti shown to be Adriana’s will. There was also no indication that
● Apparently, during the investigation the Court found that the the will was burned under Adriana’s express direction, and neither was
will was allegedly burned by the househelp of Adriana, a it done in the presence of the testatrix herself. Both witnesses,
Guadalupe and Eladio, stated that they were the only ones in the As such, the SC approved the probate of Adriana Maloto’s last will
kitchen when they burned it on the stove. and testament.

MOLO V. MOLO
21 September 1951 | Bautista Angelo, J. | Article 830 Facts:
 Mariano died leaving his wife, nieces and nephews as his heirs.
 Mariano, during his lifetime, executed two wills. The first one
PETITIONER: JUANA JUAN VDA. DE MOLO was executed in 1918 and the other in 1939.
RESPONDENTS: LUZ, GLICERIA and CORNELIO  The 1939 will contains a revocation clause which revokes the
MOLO will executed in the year 1918.
 Juana filed a petition seeking the probate of the will of Mariano
SUMMARY: executed in 1939.
Mariano Molo executed two wills, one in 1918 and the other  The 1939 will was granted probate. However, this was opposed
by the nieces and nephews of Mariano.
in 1939. Juana filed for the probate of the 1939 will which
 The probate was set aside and upon presentation of evidence,
was opposed by the nieces and nephew heirs of Mariano.
the court denied the probate on the ground that was not
The probate for the 1939 will was denied. Several years executed in accordance with the law.
after, Juana filed for the probate of the 1918 will executed by  In 1944, Juana filed a petition for probate of the will executed
Mariano which was opposed by the nieces and nephews of by Mariano in 1918.
Mariano. They claimed that Juana is now estopped from  The nieces and nephews of Mariano opposed the petition on
seeking probate of the 1918 will as it was already revoked by the ground that the 1918 will was already revoked by the 1939
the 1939 will. The Court ruled in favor of Juana, will.

Issue: 
DOCTRINE: 
Whether or not the will of Mariano executed in 1918 was
The doctrine of dependent relative revocation states that revoked by the will he executed in 1939
where the act of destruction of the will is connected with the
making of another will, so as to fairly rise the inference that
the testator meant the revocation of the old to depend upon Ruling:
the efficacy of the new disposition; and if for any reason, the
 No. The will executed in 1918 was not revoked by the will
new will intended to be made as a substitute is inoperative,
executed in 1939.
the revocations fails and the original will remain in full
 A subsequent will, containing a clause revoking a previous
force.
will, having been disallowed, for the reason that it was not
executed in conformity with the provisions of section 618 of
 the Code of Civil Procedure as to the making of wills, cannot
produce the effect of annulling the previous will, inasmuch as
said revocatory clause is void.
 The Court ruled that the will can still be probated under the
principle of dependent relative revocation.
 This doctrine applies when a testator cancels or destroys a
will or executes an instrument intended to revoke a will
with the intention to make a new testamentary disposition
as substitute for the old, and the new disposition fails of
effect for some reason.