27 CRUZ, ET AL. V. DE JESUS, ET AL.
(1929) conjugal partnership dissolved by the death of one of the
Rule 73 | Rule on Venue and Process
Ponente J. Villareal
Summary
1. Juliana Nabong died, thus dissolving the conjugal partnership
between her and her husband. Plaintiffs Donato Cruz, et al. filed
a complaint for partition of Juliana’s estate. They filed a motion
to amend their complaint to change the title from PARTITION
to LIQUIDATION AND PARTITION, and to insert a paragraph
stating that the decedent did not leave any outstanding debt.
CFI of Nueva Ecija denied the motion, stating that the proper
action is the testate or intestate proceeding for settlement of
estate where conjugal property must first be liquidated.
2. The question to determine is whether or not an action lies for
the liquidation and partition of the property of conjugal
partnership dissolved by death of the wife, without the surviving
spouse having inventoried, liquidated, or partitioned it, and it
not appearing that there is any debt to pay.
3. The Court held that the action for liquidation and partition will
lie. Section 685 of Act No. 190, as amended by Act No. 3176
provides that when there are no debts to pay, the liquidation
and partition of the property of the conjugal partnership
dissolved by the death of one of the spouses, may be made in
an ordinary action instituted for that purpose.
Facts
1. (The case did not sufficiently describe who plaintiffs and
defendants are, but you’ll get the story once you read the entire
digest.)
2. Plaintiffs Cruz, et al. filed a motion to amend their complaint as
follows:
• Change title from “Partition” to “Liquidation and Partition,” and
• Insert paragraph 5A stating that the decedent Juliana Nabong
left no debt outstanding debt at her death nor any money or
credit payable to the estate and that lands described in the
complaint are free from all liens and encumbrances.
3. The CFI of Nueva Ecija denied the motion, holding that the
proper action for the partition of property belonging to a
spouses is the testate or intestate proceeding for the settlement
of the estate of the deceased spouse, wherein said conjugal
property must first be liquidated before the partition is made.
Thus, the present appeal.
Issue
WON an action lies for liquidation and partition of the property of a
conjugal partnership dissolved by the death of the wife, said
property having been in the possession of the surviving spouse for
many years, without his having made any inventory thereof, nor
liquidated and partitioned it, and it not appearing that there is any
debt to pay.
Held
Yes.
Section 685 of Act No. 190 as amended by Act No. 3176
establishes two methods of liquidating the property of a conjugal
partnership, if the marriage is dissolved by the death of one of the
spouses.
The first is by testate or intestate proceeding according to whether
the deceased died with or without a will. The other is by ordinary
proceeding for liquidation and partition.
When the marriage is dissolved by the death of the wife, as in this
case, the legal power of management of the husband ceases,
passing to the administrator appointed by the court in the testate or
intestate proceedings instituted to that end if there by any debts to
be paid, and when there is no debt pending, the liquidation and
partition may be made in an ordinary proceeding for that purpose.
Since there are no debts to pay, the action for partition will lie,
because while it is true that it prays for a liquidation of the property
of the conjugal partnership dissolved by the death of Juliana, said
liquidation is implied in the action for partition.
In sum, when there are no debts to pay, the liquidation and partition
of the property of the conjugal partnership, dissolved by the death
of one of the spouses, may be made in an ordinary action instituted
for that purpose.