PEÑA, TABITHA ERLINDA MA. PAS A.

CASE DIGEST

FLORES vs. ESCUDERO

G.R. No. L-5302. March 11, 1953
Montemayor, J.

FACTS:

1. Regino Beltran and Simeona de Mesa were married in Laguna in 1877—They had three
children, namely: Mariano, Eulalio and Romualda.
2. Sometime in 1902, Regino left Simeona and never returned to their conjugal home—He
died in 1925 while living separately from Simeona.
3. In 1912, while living separately from Regino, Simeona purchased a parcel of land which
she sometimes managed alongside her son Mariano until it was sold to couple Arsenio
Escudero and Rosario Adap—Mariano signed the Deed of Sale and conveyed whatever
right and interest he had in said parcel to Arsenio and Rosario.
4. Meanwhile, Romualda was married to Ponciano Flores with whom she had nine children
out of wedlock--She died two years ahead of her mother Simeona in 1941.
5. Eight years later, Ponciano, on behalf of his nine children with Romualda (hereinafter
Gertrudo et al.), attempted to repurchase one-sixth (1/6) of said parcel which is supposed
to be the portion corresponding to Romualda as inheritance from her father Regino (who
is said to have owned one-half (1/2) of the parcel as his share of the conjugal partnership
property)--The attempt, however, failed, thereby causing Gertrudo et al. to pray for the
recovery of one-sixth (1/6) of said parcel before the trial court.
6. In its decision, the trial court found the whole parcel, having been purchased during the
marriage of Simeona and Regino, was conjugal property and that upon Regino's death,
one-half (1/2) thereof which belonged to him was inherited by his three children with
Simeona, including Romualda; hence, Gertrudo et al. had a right to one-sixth (1/6) of the
parcel as their inheritance from their mother.
7. In addition, the trial court declared the sale of the parcel corresponding to Romualda null
and void, and ordered Arsenio and Rosario to pay Gertrudo et al. monthly rental until
complete delivery of said corresponding parcel.
8. Arsenio and Rosario appealed the decision, contending that the land purchased by
Simeona in 1912 is exclusive property because her husband Regino contributed nothing
to its acquisition given that he had abandoned her and was living separately from her.

ISSUE:

W/N the land purchased by Simeona in 1912 during the lifetime of her husband Regino
but while living separately from him was conjugal partnership property

RULING:

YES. Under the law, all property acquired during the marriage regardless of whether the
spouses are living together or not is conjugal property. While the purchase was made exclusively
by Simeona, it was not shown that she made the purchase with her own money. In the absence of
proof to that effect, the law equally presumes that the money came from conjugal funds which
may consist of any income from conjugal properties or from the exclusive properties of the
spouses or from services, industry, wages or work of the spouses or of either of them.

*** Even property bought by a spouse while living separately but during the lifetime of the other
is presumed to be community (conjugal). (Gesmundo, p. 298)