ARTURIO TRINIDAD, petitioner,

vs.
COURT OF APPEALS, FELIX TRINIDAD (deceased) andLOURDES TRINIDAD, respondents
April 20, 1998
FACTS:
On August 10, 1978, plaintiff and petitioner filed with the Court of First Instance and action
for partition of four (4) parcels of land. He was claiming that he was the son of the deceasedInocentes
Trinidad. Patricio Trinidad, the father of the deceased, owned four (4) parcels of land,which he left
to his three children namely, Inocentes, Lourdes, and Felix. The refusal of the defendants, Lourdes
and Felix, to the demand of Arturo to the partition of the land into three (3)equal parts caused Arturo
to file a case which was decided in his favour.The Appellate court did not decide in favor of Arturo and
reversed the ruling of the lower court onthe ground that he was not able to present sufficient evidence
to prove that his parents were legally married to each other.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the failure to present a marriage contract would mean that there was no marriage that
transpired.
RULING:
While it is true that a marriage contract is the primary evidence of a marriage, the failure topresent it
does not prove that no marriage took place because there are other evidences thatcould have the
same bearing as a marriage contract. He failed to present the marriage contractdue to the destruction
of such records. His act of presenting witnesses who were present duringthe nuptial of his parents,
his baptismal certificate and the affirmation of the cohabitation of hisparents is enough evidence
to prove the marriage of his parents.