G.R. No.

176422
March 20, 2013
MARIA MENDOZA, in her own capacity and as Attorney-in-fact of DEOGRACIAS, MARCELA, DIONISIA,
ADORA CION, all surnamed MENDOZA, REMEDIOS MONTILLA, FELY BAUTISTA, JULIANA
GUILALAS and ELVIRA MENDOZA, Petitioners,
vs.
JULIA POLl CARPIO DELOS SANTOS, substituted by her heirs, CARMEN P. DELOS SANTOS, ROSA
BUENA VENTURA, ZENAIDA P. DELOS SANTOS VDA. DE MATEO, LEONILA P. DELOS SANTOS,
ELVIRA P. DELOS SANTOS VDA. DE JOSE, TERESITA P. DELOS SANTOS-CABUHAT, MERCEDITA P.
DELOS SANTOS, LYDIA P. DELOS SANTOS VDA. DE HILARIO, PERFECTO P. DELOS SANTOS, JR.,
and CECILIA M. MENDOZA, Respondents.
Reserva troncal is a special rule designed primarily to assure the return of a reservable property to the
third degree relatives belonging to the line from which the property originally came, and avoid its being
dissipated into and by the relatives of the inheriting ascendant.
Facts:
-The properties subject in the instant case are three parcels of land located in Sta. Maria, Bulacan
-Petitioners are grandchildren of Placido Mendoza and Dominga Mendoza. Placido and Dominga had four
children: Antonio, Exequiel, married to Leonor, Apolonio and Valentin. Petitioners Maria, Deogracias,
Dionisia, Adoracion, Marcela and Ricardo are the children of Antonio. Petitioners Juliana, Fely, Mercedes,
Elvira and Fortunato, on the other hand, are Valentins children. Petitioners alleged that the properties
were part of Placido and Domingas properties that were subject of an oral partition and subsequently
adjudicated to Exequiel. After Exequiels death, it passed on to his spouse Leonor and only daughter,
Gregoria. After Leonors death, her share went to Gregoria. In 1992, Gregoria died intestate and without
issue. They claimed that after Gregorias death, respondent, who is Leonors sister, adjudicated unto
herself all these properties as the sole surviving heir of Leonor and Gregoria. Hence, petitioners claim that
the properties should have been reserved by respondent in their behalf and must now revert back to
them, applying Article 891 of the Civil Code on reserva troncal.
-Respondent, however, denies any obligation to reserve the properties as these did not originate from
petitioners familial line and were not originally owned by Placido and Dominga. According to respondent,
the properties were bought by Exequiel and Antonio from a certain Alfonso Ramos in 1931. It appears,
however, that it was only Exequiel who was in possession of the properties.
-rtc ruled in favor of petitioners but ca reversed the decision for failure to establish that properties were
owned by placido and dominga and neither Exequiel predeceased Placido and Dominga nor did Gregoria
predecease Exequiel.
issue: won there is reserva troncal
held: no.
-Art. 891. The ascendant who inherits from his descendant any property which the latter may have
acquired by gratuitous title from another ascendant, or a brother or sister, is obliged to reserve such
property as he may have acquired by operation of law for the benefit of relatives who are within the third
degree and belong to the line from which said property came.
-It should be pointed out that the ownership of the properties should be reckoned only from Exequiels as
he is the ascendant from where the first transmission occurred, or from whom Gregoria inherited the
properties in dispute. The law does not go farther than such ascendant/brother/sister in determining the
lineal character of the property.17 It was also immaterial for the CA to determine whether Exequiel
predeceased Placido and Dominga or whether Gregoria predeceased Exequiel. What is pertinent is that
Exequiel owned the properties and he is the ascendant from whom the properties in dispute originally
came. Gregoria, on the other hand, is the descendant who received the properties from Exequiel by
gratuitous title.
-Gregorias ascendants are her parents, Exequiel and Leonor, her grandparents, great-grandparents and
so on.
-Not being Gregorias ascendants, both petitioners and Julia, therefore, are her collateral relatives. In
determining the collateral line of relationship, ascent is made to the common ancestor and then descent
to the relative from whom the computation is made. In the case of Julias collateral relationship with

Gregoria, ascent is to be made from Gregoria to her mother Leonor (one line/degree), then to the
common ancestor, that is, Julia and Leonors parents (second line/degree), and then descent to Julia, her
aunt (third line/degree). Thus, Julia is Gregorias collateral relative within the third degree and not her
ascendant.
-Moreover, petitioners cannot be considered reservees/reservatarios as they are not relatives within the
third degree of Gregoria from whom the properties came. The person from whom the degree should be
reckoned is the descendant/prepositusthe one at the end of the line from which the property came and
upon whom the property last revolved by descent.19 It is Gregoria in this case. Petitioners are Gregorias
fourth degree relatives, being her first cousins. First cousins of the prepositus are fourth degree relatives
and are not reservees or reservatarios.
-They cannot even claim representation of their predecessors Antonio and Valentin as Article 891 grants a
personal right of reservation only to the relatives up to the third degree from whom the reservable
properties came. The only recognized exemption is in the case of nephews and nieces of the prepositus,
who have the right to represent their ascendants (fathers and mothers) who are the brothers/sisters of the
prepositus and relatives within the third degree.
-The conclusion, therefore, is that while it may appear that the properties are reservable in character,
petitioners cannot benefit from reserva troncal. First, because Julia, who now holds the properties in
dispute, is not the other ascendant within the purview of Article 891 of the Civil Code and second,
because petitioners are not Gregorias relatives within the third degree. Hence, the CAs disposition that
the complaint filed with the RTC should be dismissed, only on this point, is correct.
(di sila pasok dal pang 4th degree na sila petitioners, yun lang yun)
notes:
di naresolve pa dito yung issue kasi ang question lang dito is reserva troncal, iba yung batas na
applicable dito, 1003 at 1009 dapat
Art. 1003. If there are no descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the
collateral relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the deceased in accordance with the following
articles.
Art. 1009. Should there be neither brothers nor sisters, nor children of brothers or sisters, the other
collateral relatives shall succeed to the estate.
The latter shall succeed without distinction of lines or preference among them by reason of relationship by
the whole blood.
-There are three (3) lines of transmission in reserva troncal. The first transmission is by gratuitous title,
whether by inheritance or donation, from an ascendant/brother/sister to a descendant called the
prepositus. The second transmission is by operation of law from the prepositus to the other ascendant or
reservor, also called the reservista. The third and last transmission is from the reservista to the reservees
or reservatarios who must be relatives within the third degree from which the property came.15
The lineal character of the
reservable property is reckoned
from the ascendant from whom the
prepositus received the property by
gratuitous title
The persons involved in reserva troncal are:
(1) The ascendant or brother or sister from whom the property was received by the descendant by
lucrative or gratuitous title;
(2) The descendant or prepositus (propositus) who received the property;
(3) The reservor (reservista), the other ascendant who obtained the property from the prepositus by
operation of law; and
(4) The reservee (reservatario) who is within the third degree from the prepositus and who belongs to the
(linea o tronco) from which the property came and for whom the property should be reserved by the
reservor.16
-Article 964 of the Civil Code provides for the series of degrees among ascendants and descendants, and
those who are not ascendants and descendants but come from a common ancestor, viz:
Art. 964. A series of degrees forms a line, which may be either direct or collateral.1wphi1 A direct line is
that constituted by the series of degrees among ascendants and descendants.
-A collateral line is that constituted by the series of degrees among persons who are not ascendants and
descendants, but who come from a common ancestor.

-The reservor has the legal title and dominion to the reservable property but subject to the resolutory
condition that such title is extinguished if the reservor predeceased the reservee. The reservor is a
usufructuary of the reservable property. He may alienate it subject to the reservation. The transferee gets
the revocable and conditional ownership of the reservor. The transferees rights are revoked upon the
survival of the reservees at the time of the death of the reservor but become indefeasible when the
reservees predecease the reservor.26 (Citations omitted)
It is when the reservation takes place or is extinguished,27 that a reservatario becomes, by operation of
law, the owner of the reservable property.

MARIA CANO, applicant-appellee,

vs.
DIRECTOR OF LANDS, EUSTAQUIA GUERRERO, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.
JOSE FERNANDEZ, ET AL., oppositors-appellants.
facts:
-a parcel of land located in juban sorsogon was registered to Maria Cano but subject to the right of
reservation in favor of Eustoquia Guerrero
-upon the death of the reservista Cano, the counsel of the reservatorio guerrero prayed for the
cancellation of the old title and have a new one in favor of the movant guerrero
-The motion was opposed by Jose and Teotimo Fernandez, sons of the reservista Maria Cano, who
contended that the application and operation of the reserva troncal should be ventilated in an ordinary
contentious proceeding, and that the Registration Court did not have jurisdiction to grant the motion.
-They also alleged that it must be proven that : (1) The property was received by a descendant by
gratuitous title from an ascendant or from a brother or sister;
(2) Said descendant dies without issue;
(3) The property is inherited by another ascendant by operation of law; and
(4) The existence of relatives within the third degree belonging the line from which said property came.
-In view of the recorded reserva in favor of the appellee, as expressly noted in the final decree of
registration, the lower court granted the petition for the issuance of a new certificate, for the reason that
the death of the reservista vested the ownership of the property in the petitioner as the sole reservatorio
troncal.
issue: won the court was correct in ruling in favor of Guerrero
Held: yes.
-The requisites enumerated by appellants have already been declared to exist by the decree of
registration wherein the rights of the appellee as reservatario troncal were expressly recognized:
From the stipulation of facts, it is evident that Lot No. 1799 was acquired by the Appellant Maria Cano by
inheritance from her deceased daughter, Lourdes Guerrero who, in turn, inherited the same from her
father Evaristo Guerrero and, hence, falls squarely under the provisions of Article 891 of the Civil Code;
and that each and everyone of the private oppositors are within the third degree of consaguinity of the
decedent Evaristo Guerrero, and who belonging to the same line from which the property came.
-It appears however, from the agreed stipulation of facts that with the exception of Eustaquia Guerrero,
who is the only living daughter of the decedent Evaristo Guerrero, by his former marriage, all the other
oppositors are grandchildren of the said Evaristo Guerrero by his former marriages. Eustaquia Guerrero,
being the nearest of kin, excludes all the other private oppositors, whose decree of relationship to the
decedent is remoter (Article 962, Civil Code; Director of Lands vs. Aguas, 62 Phil., 279). (Rec. App. pp.
16-17)
-This decree having become final, all persons (appellees included) are bared thereby from contesting the
existence of the constituent elements of the reserva. The only requisites for the passing of the title from
the reservista to the appellee are: (1) the death of the reservista; and (2) the fact that the reservatario has
survived the reservista. Both facts are admitted, and their existence is nowhere questioned.
-It is a consequence of these principles that upon the death of the reservista, the reservatario nearest to
the prepositus (the appellee in this case) becomes, automatically and by operation of law, the owner of
the reservable property. As already stated, that property is no part of the estate of the reservista, and
does not even answer for the debts of the latter. Hence, its acquisition by the reservatario may be entered
in the property records without necessity of estate proceedings, since the basic requisites therefor appear
of record. It is equally well settled that the reservable property can not be transmitted by a reservista to
her or his own successors mortis causa,(like appellants herein) so long as a reservatario within the third
degree from the prepositus and belonging to the line whence the property came, is in existence when the
reservista dies.
(maiiksi lang yung kaso paps, halos kumpleto q na nalalagay kasi importante mabasa mo eh, tama na
nagffulltext ka. buhay ka na dito sa mga kaso kahit di ka mag annotation. sinimulan q sa dulo, tiningnan q
ibang cases mo ganun din)

ENCARNACION FLORENTINO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants,

vs.
MERCEDES FLORENTINO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
facts:
(nagpakasal twice, 1st and 2nd marriage, namatay una)
Apolonio Isabelo Florentino II - Antonia Faz de Leon(1st wife)
9 offsprings
Jose, Juan, Maria, Encarnacion, Isabel, Espirita, Gabriel, Pedro, and Magdalena of the surname
Florentino y de Leon
2nd wife Severina Faz de Leon
2 offsprings
Mercedes and Apolonio III of the surname Florentino y de Leon
-namatay si apol, survived ni severina buhay 10, si apolonio III nabuhay after a month nung namatay si
tatay nila
-si juan, maria,isabel namatay na single
-yung mga natira may mga anak, yun ung mga petitioner.
-That on January 17 and February 13, 1890, Apolonio Isabelo Florentino executed a will before the notary
public of Ilocos Sur, instituting as his universal heirs his aforementioned ten children, the posthumos
Apolonio III and his widow Severina Faz de Leon; that he declared, in one of the paragraphs of said will,
all his property should be divided among all of his children of both marriages.
That, in the partition of the said testator's estate, there was given to Apolonio Florentino III, his posthumos
son, the property marked with the letters A, B, C, D, E, and F in the complaint, a gold rosary, pieces of
gold, of silver and of table service, livestock, palay, some personal property and other objects mentioned
in the complaint.
That Apolonio Florentino III, the posthumos son of the second marriage, died in 1891; that his mother,
Severina Faz de Leon, succeeded to all his property described in the complaint; that the widow, Severina
Faz de Leon died on November 18, 1908, leaving a will instituting as her universal heiress her only living
daughter, Mercedes Florentino; that, as such heir, said daughter took possession of all the property left at
the death of her mother, Severina Faz de Leon; that among same is included the property, described in
the complaint, which the said Severina Faz de Leon inherited from her deceased son, the posthumos
Apolonio, as reservable property; that, as a reservist, the heir of the said Mercedes Florentino deceased
had been gathering for herself alone the fruits of lands described in the complaint; that each and every
one of the parties mentioned in said complaint is entitled to one-seventh of the fruits of the reservable
property described therein, either by direct participation or by representation
Issue: won there is reserva troncal
held: yes
-The posthumos son, Apolonio Florentino III, acquired the property, now claimed by his brothers, by a
lucrative title or by inheritance from his aforementioned legitimate father, Apolonio Isabelo Florentino II.
Although said property was inherited by his mother, Severina Faz de Leon, nevertheless, she was in duty
bound, according to article 811 of the Civil Code, to reserve the property thus acquired for the benefit of
the relatives, within the third degree, of the line from which such property came.
According to the provisions of law, ascendants do not inherit the reservable property, but its enjoyment,
use or trust, merely for the reason that said law imposes the obligation to reserve and preserve same for
certain designated persons who, on the death of the said ascendants reservists, (taking into consideration
the nature of the line from which such property came) acquire the ownership of said property in fact and
by operation of law in the same manner as forced heirs (because they are also such) said property
reverts to said line as long as the aforementioned persons who, from the death of the ascendantreservists, acquire in fact the right of reservatarios (person for whom property is reserved), and are
relatives, within the third degree, of the descendant from whom the reservable property came.
Any ascendant who inherits from his descendant any property, while there are living, within the third
degree, relatives of the latter, is nothing but a life usufructuary or a fiduciary of the reservable property
received. He is, however, the legitimate owner of his own property which is not reservable property and

which constitutes his legitime, according to article 809 of the Civil Code. But if, afterwards, all of the
relatives, within the third degree, of the descendant (from whom came the reservable property) die or
disappear, the said property becomes free property, by operation of law, and is thereby converted into the
legitime of the ascendant heir who can transmit it at his death to his legitimate successors or
testamentary heirs. This property has now lost its nature of reservable property, pertaining thereto at the
death of the relatives, called reservatarios, who belonged within the third degree to the line from which
such property came.lawphil.net
Following the order prescribed by law in legitimate succession, when there are relatives of the
descendant within the third degree, the right of the nearest relative, called reservatario, over the property
which the reservista (person holding it subject to reservation) should return to him, excludes that of the
one more remote. The right of representation cannot be alleged when the one claiming same as a
reservatario of the reservable property is not among the relatives within the third degree belonging to the
line from which such property came, inasmuch as the right granted by the Civil Code in article 811 is in
the highest degree personal and for the exclusive benefit of designated persons who are the relatives,
within the third degree, of the person from whom the reservable property came. Therefore, relatives of the
fourth and the succeeding degrees can never be considered as reservatarios, since the law does not
recognize them as such.
In spite of what has been said relative to the right of representation on the part of one alleging his right as
reservatario who is not within the third degree of relationship, nevertheless there is right of representation
on the part of reservatarios who are within the third degree mentioned by law, as in the case of nephews
of the deceased person from whom the reservable property came. These reservatarios have the right to
represent their ascendants (fathers and mothers) who are the brothers of the said deceased person and
relatives within the third degree in accordance with article 811 of the Civil Code.
plaintiffs, being w/in the third degree are entitled.
note:
walang impairment ng legitime kasi di kasama sa pwede ipamana ni severina yung galing sa anak nya
dal reserved yun
With full right Severina Faz de Leon could have disposed in her will of all her own property in favor of her
only living daughter, Mercedes Florentino, as forced heiress. But whatever provision there is in her will
concerning the reservable property received from her son Apolonio III, or rather, whatever provision will
reduce the rights of the other reservatarios, the half brothers and nephews of her daughter Mercedes, is
unlawful, null and void, inasmuch as said property is not her own and she has only the right of usufruct or
of fiduciary, with the obligation to preserve and to deliver same to the reservatarios, one of whom is her
own daughter, Mercedes Florentino.
It cannot reasonably be affirmed, founded upon an express provision of law, that by operation of law all of
the reservable property, received during lifetime by Severina Faz de Leon from her son, Apolonio III,
constitutes or forms parts of the legitime pertaining to Mercedes Florentino. If said property did not come
to be the legitimate and exclusive property of Severina Faz de Leon, her only legitimate and forced
heiress, the defendant Mercedes, could not inherit all by operation of law and in accordance with the
order of legitimate succession, because the other relatives of the deceased Apolonio III, within the third
degree, as well as herself are entitled to such reservable property.

G.R. No. L-12957

March 24, 1961
CONSTANCIO SIENES, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants,
vs.
FIDEL ESPARCIA, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
facts:
Lot 3368 originally belonged to Saturnino Yaeso. With his first wife, Teresa Ruales, he had four children
named Agaton, Fernando, Paulina and Cipriana, while with his second wife, Andrea Gutang, he had an
only son named Francisco. According to the cadastral records of Ayuquitan, the properties left by
Saturnino upon his death the date of which does not clearly appear of record were left to his
children as follows: Lot 3366 to Cipriana, Lot 3367 to Fernando, Lot 3375 to Agaton, Lot 3377 (southern
portion) to Paulina, and Lot 3368 (western portion) to Francisco. As a result of the cadastral proceedings,
Original Certificate of Title No. 10275 covering Lot 3368 was issued in the name of Francisco. Because
Francisco was a minor at the time, his mother administered the property for him, declared it in her name
for taxation purposes (Exhs A & A-1), and paid the taxes due thereon (Exhs. B, C, C-1 & C-2). When
Francisco died on May 29, 1932 at the age of 20, single and without any descendant, his mother, as his
sole heir, executed the public instrument Exhibit F entitled EXTRAJUDICIAL SETTLEMENT AND SALE
whereby, among other things, for and in consideration of the sum of P800.00 she sold the property in
question to appellants. When thereafter said vendees demanded from Paulina Yaeso and her husband
Jose Esparcia, the surrender of Original Certificate of Title No. 10275 which was in their possession
the latter refused, thus giving rise to the filing of the corresponding motion in the cadastral record No. 507.
The same, however, was denied (Exhs. 8 & 9).
Thereafter, or more specifically, on July 30, 1951, Cipriana and Paulina Yaeso, the surviving half-sisters of
Francisco, and who as such had declared the property in their name, on January 1, 1951 executed a
deed of sale in favor of the spouses Fidel Esparcia and Paulina Sienes (Exh. 2) who, in turn, declared it in
their name for tax purposes and thereafter secured the issuance in their name of Transfer Certificate of
Title No. T-2141 (Exhs. 5 & 5-A).
issue: won there is reserva troncal
held: yes
As held by the trial court, it is clear upon the facts already stated, that the land in question was reservable
property. Francisco Yaeso inherited it by operation of law from his father Saturnino, and upon Francisco's
death, unmarried and without descendants, it was inherited, in turn, by his mother, Andrea Gutang. The
latter was, therefore, under obligation to reserve it for the benefit of relatives within the third degree
belonging to the line from which said property came, if any survived her. The record discloses in this
connection that Andrea Gutang died on December 13, 1951, the lone reservee surviving her being
Cipriana Yaeso who died only on January 13, 1952 (Exh. 10).
In connection with reservable property, the weight of opinion is that the reserve creates two resolutory
conditions, namely, (1) the death of the ascendant obliged to reserve and (2) the survival, at the time of
his death, of relatives within the third degree belonging to the line from which the property came (6
Manresa 268-269; 6 Sanchez Roman 1934). This Court has held in connection with this matter that the
reservista has the legal title and dominion to the reservable property but subject to a resolutory condition;
that he is like a life usufructuary of the reservable property; that he may alienate the same but subject to
reservation, said alienation transmitting only the revocable and conditional ownership of the reservists,
the rights acquired by the transferee being revoked or resolved by the survival of reservatarios at the time
of the death of the reservista (Edroso vs. Sablan, 25 Phil. 295; Lunsod vs. Ortega, 46 Phil. 664; Florentino
vs. Florentino, 40 Phil. 480; and Director of Lands vs. Aguas, 65 Phil. 279).
The sale made by Andrea Gutang in favor of appellees was, therefore, subject to the condition that the
vendees would definitely acquire ownership, by virtue of the alienation, only if the vendor died without
being survived by any person entitled to the reservable property. Inasmuch much as when Andrea Gutang
died, Cipriana Yaeso was still alive, the conclusion becomes inescapable that the previous sale made by
the former in favor of appellants became of no legal effect and the reservable property subject matter
thereof passed in exclusive ownership to Cipriana.
On the other hand, it is also clear that the sale executed by the sisters Paulina and Cipriana Yaeso in
favor of the spouses Fidel Esparcia and Paulina Sienes was subject to a similar resolutory condition. The

reserve instituted by law in favor of the heirs within the third degree belonging to the line from which the
reservable property came, constitutes a real right which the reservee may alienate and dispose of, albeit
conditionally, the condition being that the alienation shall transfer ownership to the vendee only if and
when the reservee survives the person obliged to reserve. In the present case, Cipriana Yaeso, one of the
reservees, was still alive when Andrea Gutang, the person obliged to reserve, died. Thus the former
became the absolute owner of the reservable property upon Andrea's death. While it may be true that the
sale made by her and her sister prior to this event, became effective because of the occurrence of the
resolutory condition, we are not now in a position to reverse the appealed decision, in so far as it orders
the reversion of the property in question to the Estate of Cipriana Yaeso, because the vendees the
Esparcia spouses did not appeal therefrom.
(halos full text na to papi, eto yung sale na ginawa ng reservista. di pwede. palaman lang yung intro sa
case. pwede mo na din silipin goodluck maya! wag ka pa-late)