G.R. No. 27120 - Agapito vs. Molo

Plaintiff and Appellee: Juana Agapito.
Defendant and Appellant: Candido Molo.
The case concerns the administration and income derived from the plaintiff’s paraphernal property.

The property in question is the plaintiff’s paraphernal property.
Under Article 1384 of the Civil Code, the wife is entitled to administer her paraphernal property since it has not been delivered to her husband for its management.
Although Article 1401 provides that fruits, income, or interest accrued during the marriage from the paraphernal property belong to the conjugal partnership, this does not give the husband the right to collect such income independently.
Under Article 1412, even though the husband administers the conjugal property, his ability to collect income is constrained when such income is needed to cover administration expenses.

The Court of First Instance of Manila issued a preliminary injunction.
The injunction permanently empowered the plaintiff to retain the net income (rents minus administrative expenses) from her paraphernal property.
The retained net income served as alimony or maintenance the defendant was required to provide.
The ruling granted the plaintiff the exclusive authority to manage and administer her property without the defendant’s intervention.

The case was influenced by principles set forth in Goitia vs. Campos Rueda (35 Phil., 252), which discussed the allocation of income from paraphernal and conjugal properties.
It was noted that the wife’s retention of the net income from rents, after necessary deductions, was not excessive and was within her rights as maintenance due from the husband.

Whether the trial court properly applied the provisions of the Civil Code regarding the management of paraphernal property and the distribution of its income.
Whether the plaintiff’s retention of the net income from the paraphernal property constitutes proper maintenance or alimony under the law.