G.R. No. L-1760. August 26, 1949

MARIA MOLATO ET AL., PETITIONERS VS. CELEDONIA ARCOS ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Decisions / Signed Resolutions August 26, 1949 TUASON, J.:


TUASON, J.:


This cause is before this Court on appeal by certiorari from
the Court of Appeals.

Celedonio Arcos died intestate leaving several parcels of land,
a widow named Maria Molato and two children named Salvador Arcos and Alfredo
Arcos and had by Maria Molato. Claiming to be the legitimate children of the
deceased Celedonio Arcos by a previous marriage with one Severina Monarca, the
plaintiffs, Celedonia Arcos and Raymundo Arcos, commenced the present action in
the Court of First Instance of Iloilo against Celedonio Arcos’ surviving wife
and his two children by the latter, demanding a share in the decedent’s
estate.

The defendants alleged, and the Court of First Instance found,
that the plaintiffs’ father was one Pedro Corate. More, they alleged, and the
Court found, that Celedonio Arcos and the plaintiffs’ mother, Severina Monarca,
were never married.

But the Court of Appeals believed differently and reversed the
trial court’s decision. It concluded “from the evidence submitted that the
appellants Celedonia Arcos and Raymundo Arcos are legitimate children of the
late Celedonio Arcos,” and held that they are entitled to share Celedonio Arcos’
estate equally with Arcos’ children by his second wife, “without prejudice to
the rights, hereditary or conjugal, of Maria Molato, as the surviving spouse of
the second marriage.”

The questions decided by the Court of Appeals and brought here
for review are legitimately and exclusively questions of fact. There was no
departure from the usual course of judicial proceedings, nor a violation of any
of the rules of evidence. Appellees’ Exhibits 1 to 8 are not agreements between
the parties, the terms of which may not, according to Section 22 of Rule 123, be
varied by oral evidence. What is more, the Court of Appeals merely construed
these exhibits and weighed their probative value; it did not undertake to alter
their meaning.

As this Court may review only questions of law, this appeal
will be dismissed with costs. It is so ordered.

Moran, Ozaeta, Feria, Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, and
Reyes, concur.