7/30/2019 Mariategui vs CA Case Digest

1/2

Mariategui vs CA Case Digest

Mariategui vs. CA

G.R. No. L-57062 January 24, 1992

Facts: Lupo Mariategui contracted three marriages during his lifetime. On his first wife, EusebiaMontellano, who died on November 8, 1904, he begot four children, Baldomera, Maria delRosario, Urbana and Ireneo. With his second wife, Flaviana Montellano, he begot a daughternamed Cresenciana. And his third wife, Felipa Velasco, he begot three children, namely Jacinto,Julian and Paulina.

At the time of Lupos death he left certain properties with which he acquired when he was stillunmarried. Lupo died without a will. Upon his death, descendants from his first and secondmarriages executed a deed of extrajudicial partition on Lot No. 163. However, the children on

Lupos third marriage filed with the lower court an amended complaint claiming that they weredeprive on the partition of Lot No. 163 which were owned by their common father. Thepetitioners, children on first and second marriage, filed a counterclaim to dismiss the saidcomplaint. Trial court denied the motion to dismiss and also the complaint by the respondents,children on third marriage.

Respondents elevated the case on CA on the ground that the trial court committed an error for notfinding the third marriage to be lawfully married and also in holding respondents are notlegitimate children of their said parents. CA rendered a decision declaring all the children and

descendants of Lupo, including the respondents, are entitled to equal shares of estate of theirfather. However, petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration of said decision.

Issue: Whether or not respondents were able to prove their succession rights over the saidestate.

Ruling: With respect to the legal basis of private respondents' demand for partition of the estate

of Lupo Mariategui, the Court of Appeals aptly held that the private respondents are legitimatechildren of the deceased.

Lupo Mariategui and Felipa Velasco were alleged to have been lawfully married in or about1930. This fact is based on the declaration communicated by Lupo Mariategui to Jacinto whotestified that "when his father was still living, he was able to mention to him that he and hismother were able to get married before a Justice of the Peace of Taguig, Rizal." The spousesdeported themselves as husband and wife, and were known in the community to be such.

Although no marriage certificate was introduced to this effect, no evidence was likewise offered

to controvert these facts. Moreover, the mere fact that no record of the marriage exists does notinvalidate the marriage, provided all requisites for its validity are present.

7/30/2019 Mariategui vs CA Case Digest

2/2

Under these circumstances, a marriage may be presumed to have taken place between Lupoand Felipa. The laws presume that a man and a woman, deporting themselves as husband andwife, have entered into a lawful contract of marriage; that a child born in lawful wedlock, therebeing no divorce, absolute or from bed and board is legitimate; and that things have happenedaccording to the ordinary course of nature and the ordinary habits of life.