MARIA CALMA, AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE TESTAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS OF FAUSTA MACASAQUIT, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. ESPERANZA TAÑEDO, ASSISTED BY HER HUSBAND FELIPE MAMAUAL, AND B…

The
spouses Eulalio Calma and Fausta Macasaquit were the owners of the
property described in the complaint, being their conjugal property.
They were also indebted to Esperanza Tañedo, chargeable against the
conjugal property, in the sums of P348.34 and P247, with interest
thereon at 10 per cent per annum. On October 10, 1933, Fausta
Macasaquit died leaving a will wherein she appointed her daughter,
Maria Calma, as administratrix of her properties. Upon the commencement
of the corresponding probate proceedings in the Court of First Instance
of Tarlac, the said daughter, Maria Calma, was appointed judicial
administratrix of the properties of the deceased.

While
these probate proceedings of the deceased Fausta Macasaquit were
pending, Esperanza Tañedo, on January 27, 1934, filed a complaint
against Eulalio Calma for the recovery of the sums of P948.34 and P247.
The Court of First Instance of Tarlac rendered judgment for the payment
of this sum. In the execution of this judgment, despite the third party
claim filed by Fausta Macasaquit, the property described in the
complaint was sold by the sheriff.

Maria Calma, as
administratrix of the estate of Fausta Macasaquit, now brings this
action and asks that the sale made by the sheriff of the property
described in the complaint be annulled and that the estate of Fausta
Macasaquit be declared the sole and absolute owner thereof.

The court absolved the defendants from this complaint.

The probate proceedings of the deceased Fausta Macasaquit were instituted in accordance with Act No. 3176 reading:

“Sec
685. When the marriage is dissolved by the death of the husband or
wife, the community property shall be inventoried, administered, and
liquidated, and the debts thereof shall be paid, in the testamentary or
intestate proceedings of the deceased spouse, in accordance with the
provisions of this Code relative to the administration and liquidation
of the estates of deceased persons, or in an ordinary liquidation and
partition proceeding, unless the parties, being all of age and legally
capacitated, avail themselves of the right granted to them by this Code
of proceeding to an extrajudicial partition and liquidation of said
property.

“In case it is necessary to sell any portion of
said community property in order to pay the outstanding debts and
obligations of the same, such sale shall be made in the manner and with
the formalities established by this Code for the sale of the property
of deceased persons. Any sale, transfer, alienation or disposition of
said property effected without said formalities shall be null and void,
except as regards the portion that belonged to the vendor at the time
the liquidation and partition was made.”

Prior to this Act, the liquidation of conjugal property was made under
section 685 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Interpreting the scope of
Act No. 3176, this court, in the case of Caragay vs. Urquiza
(53 Phil., 72), said that the amendment introduced by this Act consists
in authorizing the institution of testate or intestate proceedings for
the settlement of the estate of a deceased spouse or of an ordinary
action for the liquidation and partition of the property of a conjugal
partnership. It should be understood that these remedies are
alternative, and not cumulative, in the sense that they cannot be
availed of at the same time, inasmuch as an anomalous and chaotic
situation would result if conjugal property were administered,
liquidated and distributed at the same time in a testamentary
proceeding and in an ordinary action for liquidation and partition of
property. Consequently, the testamentary proceedings of Fausta
Macasaquit having been instituted, the liquidation and partition of the
conjugal property by reason of her marriage to Eulalio Calma should be
made in these proceedings, to the exclusion of any other proceeding for
the same purpose.

Interpreting this same Act No. 3176 in another decision, this court, in the case of Cruz vs.
De Jesus (52 Phil., 870) said that when the marriage is dissolved by
the death of the wife, the legal power of management of the husband
ceases, passing to the administrator appointed by the court in the
testate or intestate proceedings instituted to that end if there be any
debts to be paid. This doctrine has been confirmed in the other case of
Ona vs. De Gala (58 Phil., 881).

From the foregoing
it follows that when Esperanza Tañedo brought suit against Eulalio
Calma for the payment of the sums of P948.34 and P247, which were debts
chargeable against the conjugal property, the power of Eulalio Calma,
legal administrator of the conjugal property while Fausta Macasaquit
was living, had ceased and passed to the administratrix Maria Calma
appointed in the testamentary proceedings of Fausta Macasaquit. Hence,
this being an indebtedness chargeable against conjugal property, no
complaint for its payment can be brought against Eulalio Calma, who had
already ceased as administrator of the conjugal property; the claim for
this amount had to be filed in the testamentary proceedings of Fausta
Macasaquit.

Having to be filed according to Act No. 3176
under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure relative to the
administration and liquidation of properties of deceased persons, it
should be filed before the committee on claims in said testamentary
proceedings and, at all events, thereafter, by appeal to the
corresponding Court of First Instance, in an ordinary action against
the judicial administratrix.

On the other hand, the property
described in the complaint is included among the inventoried properties
subject to the testamentary proceedings of Fausta Macasaquit because,
belonging as it does to the conjugal property, it should, under Act No.
3176, be included among the properties of the testamentary proceedings.

We conclude that, Eulalio Calma having ceased as legal administrator of
the conjugal property had with his wife Fausta Macasaquit, no complaint
can be brought against him for the recovery of an indebtedness
chargeable against said conjugal property, and that the action should
be instituted in the testamentary proceedings of the deceased Fausta
Macasaquit in the manner provided by law, by filing it first with the
committee on claims.

Wherefore, we hold that the sale of the
property described in the complaint, made by the sheriff in execution
of the judgment rendered against Eulalio Calma for the collection of
the indebtedness chargeable against the conjugal property, is void and
said property should be deemed subject to the testamentary proceedings
of the deceased Fausta Macasaquit for all the purposes of that case.

The appealed judgment is reversed, without special pronouncement as to the costs. So ordered.

Villa-Real, Abad Santos, Imperial, Diaz, Laurel, and Concepcion, JJ., concur.