Atilano v. Chua Ching Bing (1958)

ATILANO V. CHUA CHING BING

GR No. L-11086

March 26, 1958

PARTIES:

- Petitioner: Pilar Atilano

- Respondent: Chua Ching Beng

* Appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance (Zamboanga)

FACTS:

·       May 1951 – Atilano and Chua Ching Beng married in Zamboanga

·       Established residence in Manila after the marriage; returned to visit Zamboanga in October 1951

·       It seems that he was prevailed upon by the wife’s parents to return Manila, leaving her behind.

- Thought she would follow him back to Manila but she did not.

- Sept. 30, 1953 – Pilar Atilano filed a COMPLAINT FOR SUPPORT against Chua Ching Beng

- Claims they have been estranged and living separately since October 1952 by reason of incessant marital bickerings and brought about by the incompatibility of temperament and Chua Ching Beng’s inability to provide for themselves a separate home from the latter’s parents (No evidence was found RE: Temperament)

- Atilano states she is unemployed and is currently living with her parents.

- Demands that Chua Ching Beng be ordered to give her a monthly allowance of P200.00 from the date of the filing of the complaint.

- Atilano filed his answer contending, praying the complaint be dismissed:

- They lived in harmony and understanding when they were living in Manila.

- October 1951: They visited Atilano’s parents in Zamboanga when her parents prevailed him to return to Manila, allowing for her to stay with her parents for a while but believing that she would follow him later to Manila.

- Through “insidious machinations” Atilano’s parents caused her to be alienated from him resulting in her refusal to return to Manila and live with her husband again.

- Defendant went back to Manila to fetch her; Atilano was prevented from her parents to go with him through force and intimidation; parents exerted undue pressure and influence on Atilano to file a complaint.

- Averred that he was not evading his obligation to support his wife,but would prefer to fulfill said duty by receiving and maintaining her in Manila.

- States that as the husband, he has the right to fix marital residence; he would be willing to establish a conjugal dwelling in Manila separate from the parents

- Atilano filed a petition for ALIMONY PENDENTE LITE premised on the same facts, based upon stipulation of facts agreed upon by both parties

- COFI: court rendered judgment granting the wife a monthly allowance of P75; Root cause being the disagreements common among relatives by affinity

ISSUE: W/N a wife is entitled to receive support from her husband where she refused to live with him on account of some misunderstandings she had with the husband’s relatives.

HOLDING:

- Article 229 (now 111 of the Civil Code): he is given the option to fulfill the said duty by either paying the allowance, or by receiving and maintaining in his house the person who has a right to receive support. The latter cannot be availed of in case there is a moral or legal obstacle thereto.

- “Misunderstandings” with in-laws and relatives not a moral or legal obstacle; it is common facet of married life.

JUDGMENT:

- Decision appealed MODIFIED, giving the defendant husband Chua Ching Beng the option of supporting his wife at their conjugal dwelling apart from “the home of the parents of the husband.”

- Should wife refuse by the terms of this decision, the husband is considered relieved from the obligation of giving any support to his wife.