Specpro Digests

Ateneolaw3B Specpro Digests Page 1 of 86
Luzon Surety vs. Quebar (R 81 2-4; R 86, 1; R90 1-3) 12 S!R" 29#
Luzon Surety issued 2 administrator's bond (P15,000.00 each), in behalf of Pastor .
!uebrar, as administrator of the testate estates of ". #. $hinsuy and $resenciana
Li%a,.
&or the first year, %remiums and documentary stam%s 'ere %aid. (n )une *, 1+5,,
the $&- of .e/ros (ccidental a%%ro0ed the amended Pro1ect of Partition and "ccounts
of !uebrar. (n 2ay 3, 1+*2, Luzon Surety demanded the %ayment of the %remiums
and documentary stam%s but the !uebrar mo0ed for the cancellation and4or reduction
of e5ecutor's bonds on the /round that 6the heirs of these testate estates ha0e already
recei0ed their res%ecti0e shares6. he $&- of .e/ros (ccidental ordered the bonds
cancelled.
(n )anuary 3, 1+*7, the Luzon Surety filed the case 'ith the $&- of 2anila. he
defendants8a%%ellants offered P1,300.00 by 'ay of amicable settlement 'hich the
Luzon Surety refused. he lo'er court allo'ed the %laintiff to reco0er from the
defendants8a%%ellants. 9efendants8a%%ellants a%%ealed to the $". $" certified the
herein case to the S$ after findin/ that this case in0ol0es only errors or :uestions of
la'.
$SS%&' ;hether or not the administrator's bonds 'ere in force and effect from and
after the year that they 'ere filed and a%%ro0ed by the court u% to 1+*2, 'hen they
'ere cancelled
(&L)' Section 1 of <ule 31 the administrator4e5ecutor to %ut u% a bond for the
%ur%ose of indemnifyin/ the creditors, heirs, le/atees and the estate. -t is conditioned
u%on the faithful %erformance of the administrator's trust.
he surety is then liable under the administrator's bond, for as lon/ as the
administrator has duties to do as such administrator4e5ecutor. !uebrar still had
somethin/ to do as an administrator4e5ecutor e0en after the a%%ro0al of the amended
%ro1ect of %artition and accounts. Li:uidation means the determination of all the assets
of the estate and payment of all the debts and expenses. -t a%%ears that there 'ere
still debts and e5%enses to be %aid after )une *, 1+5,.
he sureties of an administration bond are liable only as a rule, for matters occurrin/
durin/ the term co0ered by the bond. "nd the term of a bond does not usually e5%ire
until the administration has been closed and terminated in the manner directed by la'.
hus, as lon/ as the %robate court retains 1urisdiction of the estate, the bond
contemplates a continuing liability not'ithstandin/ the non8rene'al of the bond by the
defendants8a%%ellants.
he lo'er court 'as correct. he %ayment of the annual %remium is to be enforced as
%art of the consideration, and not as a condition for the %ayment 'as not made a
condition to the attachin/ or continuin/ of the contract. he %remium is the
consideration for furnishin/ the bonds and the obli/ation to %ay the same subsists for
as lon/ as the liability of the surety shall e5ist.
Ro*r+,uez vs. S+-va R 81 2-4 90 ./+- #2
his a%%eal is from an order of the $&- of 2anila authorizin/ the cancellation of the
bond of Pablo 2. Sil0a 'ho had resi/ned as 1oint administrator of the intestate estate
of =onofre Leyson, deceased, and allo'in/ Sil0a P*00 as com%ensation for his
ser0ices. he a%%ellants are the remainin/ administrator and an heir of the deceased.
$SS%&' 2ay the court fi5 an administrator's or e5ecutor's fee in e5cess of the fees
%rescribed by section , of <ule 3*, 'hich follo's>
(&L)' ?es. -t 'ill be seen from this %ro0ision that a /reater sum may be allo'ed 6in
any s%ecial case, 'here the estate is lar/e, and the settlement has been attended
'ith /reat difficulty, and has re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of the
e5ecutor or administrator.6 "nd so it has been held that 6the amount of an e5ecutor's
fee allo'ed by the $&- in any s%ecial case under the %ro0isions of Section *30 of the
$ode of $i0il Procedure is a matter lar/ely in the discretion of the %robate court, 'hich
'ill not be disturbed on a%%eal, e5ce%t for an abuse of discretion.6
he fact that the a%%ellee is an attorney8at8la' has ser0ed the estate in /ood stead,
has ser0ed the estate in /ood stead, and this ou/ht not be lost si/ht it. "lthou/h bein/
a la'yer is by itself not a factor in the assessment of an administrator's fee, it should
be other'ise as in this case the administrator 'as able to sto% 'hat a%%eared to be
an im%ro0ident disbursement of a substantial amount 'ithout ha0in/ to em%loy
outside le/al hel% at an additional e5%ense to estate.
$SS%&' ;(. the lo'er court erred in cancellin/ Sil0a's administrators bond,
inasmuch as fe' months before his resi/nation, he secured the cancellation of a $
issued in the name of =onofre Leyson, and in their stead another titles 'ere issued in
the name of 2r. Pablo 2. Sil0a, in a doubtful manner.
(&L)' here is no sho'in/ that 9e Sil0a 'as /uilty of misa%%ro%riation or any of the
acts of commission or omission for 'hich his bond could be held liable under <ule 3*.
he sole /round for the insistence that this cancellation should ha0e been 'ithheld is
that the a%%ellee is in %ossession of a residential lot in $ubao, !uezon $ity, 'hich
belon/ed to the deceased =onofre Leyson. #ut the a%%ellee claims that this lot 'as
sold to him by Leyson on 2arch 2, 1+@5. $ertainly it 'as already in %ossession 'hen
he and a%%ellant <odri/uez tooA o0er the administration from the s%ecial
administratri5. his land therefore did not come into 9e Sil0a's hands in %ursuance or
in the in0entory %re%ared by or in con1unction 'ith one of the a%%ellants. B0en
/rantin/ then, for the saAe of ar/ument, that 9e Sil0a has no 0alid title to this lot, the
sureties are not char/eable for it on the bond. 9e Sil0a's liability is %ersonal and
e5clusi0e of the sureties 'ho are the %arties mostly affected by the third assi/nment of
error.
2oreo0er, there is a %endin/ suit o0er this %ro%erty and that suit affords the estate
am%le %rotection a/ainst the said %ro%erty bein/ alienated %endin/ final dis%osition of
the liti/ation.
C%on the fore/oin/ consideration, the order a%%ealed from is affirmed, 'ith costs.
"*v+n0u-a vs. 1eo*oro R 82 1 99 2/+- 413
Bmilio "d0incula 'as a%%ointed s%ecial administrator, then later re/ular administrator
of his deceased 'ifeDs estate. "fter he :ualified as administrator, his brothers8in8la'
submitted a document %ur%ortin/ to be the deceasedDd 'ill. Bmilio o%%osed the
%robate of the 'ill on the /round that the si/nature 'as not his 'ifeDs and e0en if it
'as, the same 'as %rocured by fraud. (ne of the brothers8in8la', Bnri:ue Lacson,
%rayed that he (Bnri:ue) be a%%ointed administrator in lieu of Bmilio. 9urin/ the
hearin/, it 'as alle/ed that Bmilio 'as incom%etent, inca%able and unsuitable to act
as administrator because Bmilio is forei/n to the estateE. he court ruled in fa0or of
Bnri:ueDs motion. Bmilio filed an 2< but the same 'as denied so he instituted the
%resent action for certiorari to annul the lo'er courtDs order.
$SS%&' ;(. the lo'er court acted 'ith F"9LB) in /rantin/ LacsonDs motion
(&L)' ?es. he a%%ointment of Lacson as administrator in lieu of "d0incula is
%redicated on the fact that Lacson 'as named e5ecutor of the deceasedDd 'ill. his
%ro0ision, ho'e0er cannot be enforced until the said 'ill is admitted to %robate.
he disco0ery of a 'ill of the deceased does not i%so facto nullify letters of
administration already issued or e0en authorize the re0ocation thereof until the
alle/ed 'ill is G%ro0ed and allo'ed by the courtE.
&urthermore, the lo'er court a%%ears to ha0e follo'ed the ar/ument of the
res%ondents that Bmilio, bein/ forei/n to the deceasedDs estate is inca%able of bein/
an administrator. his ar/ument is untenable because from the 0ie'%oint of lo/ic and
e5%erience, a stran/er may be com%etent, ca%able and fit to be administrator of the
estate in the same 'ay that a family member can be incom%etent, inca%able and unfit
to do so. #esides, Bmilio as the sur0i0in/ s%ouse if a forced heir of the deceased. =e
is entitled to H of all %ro%erty a%art from his share of the other half thereof as heir of
the deceased since Gall %ro%erty of the marria/e is %resumed to belon/ to the con1u/al
%artnershi%E8
Lao vs. 3enato (R 82 2; R89,#-) 13 S!R" 8#-86
(n )une 25, 1+30, Sotero )r., 'ith due notice to all his co8heirs, mo0ed to sell certain
%ro%erties of the deceased to %ay off certain debts. he motion 'as /ranted. So,
Sotero )r. sold to his son, Sotero ---, the sub1ect %ro%erty 'hich the latter sold to
;illiam Fo. <es%ondent8heir &lorida .u:ui, mo0ed to annul the sale on the /round
that it 'as made in 0iolation of the court's order and that the consideration of the t'o
sales 'ere /rossly inade:uate. Sotero )r. o%%osed .u:uiDs motion alle/in/ that the
actual consideration of the sale 'as P200,000.00 and they a/reed that %reference 'ill
be /i0en to close family members to Aee% the %ro%erty 'ithin the family. .u:ui filed a
<e%ly, statin/ that the t'o sales 'ere but a sin/le transaction simultaneously hatched
and consummated in one occasion. he other heirs 1oined .u:uiDs motion.
<es%ondent Fo mo0ed to inter0ene and manifested that he %aid Sotero ---
P225,000.00 and bein/ a %urchaser in /ood faith and for 0alue, his title to the %ro%erty
is indefeasible %ursuant to la'.
(n &ebruary *, 1+31, %etitioner s%ouses mo0ed to inter0ene and alle/ed that Sotero
)r, 'ithout re0ealin/ that the %ro%erty had already been sold to ;illiam Fo, entered
into a 2utual "/reement of Promise to Sell to them for P2,0,000 'hich 'as reduced
to P220,000.00I that they %aid earnest money of P,0,000I that the balance of
P150,000 'as to be %aid u%on the %roduction of the $ and the e5ecution of the final
9eed of SaleI that Sotero --- the 'as merely a nominal %arty because the ne/otiation
and transactions 'ere bet'een the Sotero )r. and %etitionersI that the contract of sale
has been %erfected because earnest money 'as already %aidI that the sale in fa0or of
Fo 'as made to defraud the estate and the other heirsI
"t the hearin/, %etitioners submitted a co%y of the $ontract of mort/a/e e5ecuted by
Sotero )r in fa0or of )uan Lao, one of the %etitioners, 'hereby the former mort/a/ed
6all his undi0ided interest in the estate of his deceased motherE.
"fter se0eral days of hearin/, res%ondent )ud/e allo'ed all the interested %arties to
bid for the %ro%erty. Fo bid P230,000.00. Petitioners bid P232,000.00, s%ot cash. "ll
the heirs, e5ce%t the administrator (Sotero )r.), filed a 2otion B5 Parte stated that the
offer of ;illiam Fo a%%ears the hi/hest obtainable %rice and that of the %etitioners
'as not been made 'ithin a reasonable %eriod. So, they submitted an amicable
settlement to 'hich the %etitioners o%%osed because they offered to buy the %ro%erty
for 700,000. 9es%ite said o%%osition, res%ondent )ud/e a%%ro0ed the "micable
Settlement.
$SS%&' ;hether or not res%ondent )ud/e is /uilty of /ra0e abuse of discretion in 1)
a%%ro0in/ the amicable settlement and confirmin/ the t'o (2) 9eeds of Sale in
:uestionI and 2) in not acce%tin/ the offer of the %etitioners in the amount of
P700,000.00 for the %urchase of the lot in :uestion.
(&L)' Sotero )r. as administrator occu%ies a %osition of the hi/hest trust and
confidence. -n the case at bar, the sale 'as made necessary 6in order to settle other
existing obligations of the estate. -n order to /uarantee faithful com%liance 'ith the
authority /ranted, res%ondent )ud/e ordered him Gto submit to this $ourt for a%%ro0al
the transactions made by him.6
he sale to his son 'as for the /rossly lo' %rice of only P,5,000,00. 9ionisio --- has
no income 'hatsoe0er and still a de%endent of 9ionisio, )r. (n to% of that, not a sin/le
centa0o, of the P,5,000.00 'as e0er accounted for nor re%orted by 9ionisio, )r. to the
%robate court. .either did he submit said transaction as mandated by the order for its
a%%ro0al. his sale 'as confirmed and le/alized by =is =(.(<'s a%%ro0al of the
assailed "micable Settlement. .o doubt, res%ondent )ud/e's :uestioned a%%ro0al
0iolates "rticle 1@0+ of the .e' $i0il $ode and cannot 'orA to confirm nor ser0e to
ratify a fictitious contract 'hich is non8e5istent and 0oid from the 0ery be/innin/. he
heirsD assent to such an ille/al scheme does not le/alize the same.
he offer by the %etitioner of P700,000.00 for the %urchase of the %ro%erty in :uestion
does not a%%ear seriously dis%uted on record. "s a/ainst the %rice stated in the
assailed $om%romise "/reement the former amount is decidedly more beneficial and
ad0anta/eous not only to the estate, the heirs of the descendants, but more
im%ortantly to its creditors, for 'hose account and benefit the sale 'as made. .o
satisfactory and con0incin/ reason a%%eared /i0en for the re1ection and4or non8
acce%tance of said offer thus /i0in/ rise to a 'ell8/rounded sus%icion that a collusion
of some sort e5ists bet'een the administrator and the heirs to defraud the creditors
and the /o0ernment.
3ust+-o vs. S+an (R 82 2) #3 S!R" 1##
"/ri%ino S. Fustilo 'as a%%ointed administrator of the estate of his deceased father,
"n/el FustiloI -n 1+25, "/ra%ino filed his accounts for the years 1+27 to 1+25,
inclusi0e. -n 1+2*, the 'ido' and the other heirs mo0ed for the remo0al of "/ra%ino
for ne/li/ence, e5orbitant accounts and ille/al e5%enses, ruinous to the state under
administration.
(n )uly 1*, 1+2,, "/ra%ino mo0ed that he be /ranted a salary of P7,000 annually. (n
the same day, "/ra%ino %resented se%arate accounts 1+2581+2* and 1+2*81+2,. -n
the first of these accounts there a%%eared a deficit of P@*2.25I 'hile in the second
there a%%eared a deficit of P7,222.+1. Leocadia 2a1ito, one of the creditors, o%%osed
to the accounts, es%ecially to the annual salary of P7,000 and the sum of P1,000 %aid
to his attorney. his o%%osition 'as reiterate in 'ritin/ in 'hich e5ce%tion 'as taAen to
the distribution of sur%lus in the amount of P11,70@.50. Still later, Leocadia 2a1ito, in a
more detailed 'ritin/ of o%%osition, %ointed out that certain alle/ed debts had been
char/ed t'ice to the estate and that no ade:uate 0ouchers 'ere e5hibited to 1ustify
the char/es.
(n "u/ust 27, 1+2,, )ud/e Santamaria (of the $&- of -loilo), disa%%ro0ed the
accounts of the administrator and ordered him to file amended accounts 'ithin thirty
days. (n Se%tember 70, 1+2,, the administrator asAed for an e5tension. (n &ebruary
23, 1+23, the administrator %resented for a second time the old accounts 'ithout
chan/e.
(n 2arch 2*, 1+23, )ud/e &ernando Salas (in the absence of Santamaria) ordered
the administrator to %resent amended accounts 'ithin ten daysI but, on "%ril ,, 1+23,
he reconsidered the order )ud/e Santamaria and at the same time a%%ro0ed the
same t'o accounts.
(n his order the o%%osin/ creditors do not a%%ear to ha0e recei0ed due notices. (n
)une 2*, 1+23, the attorney for the a%%ellant mo0ed for reconsideration of )ud/e
SalasD order, alle/in/ fraud, mistaAe and sur%rise, for the remo0al of the administrator
and for forfeiture of his bond.
$SS%&' ;(. )ud/e Salas erred in a%%ro0in/ the t'o accountsI
(&L)' ?es. -t 'as im%ro0ident, to say the least, and made 'ithout a reasonable
o%%ortunity ha0in/ been /i0en to the ad0erse creditors to maAe effecti0e o%%osition.
;e hereby set aside the order of )ud/e &ernando Salas of "%ril ,, 1+23, 'ith the
result of the %roceedin/s 'ill be restored to the %osition in 'hich they stood before
that order 'as entered, e5ce%t as stated in the ne5t %ara/ra%h.
" careful e5amination of the facts re0ealed in this record concernin/ the acti0ities of
"/ri%ino S. Fustilo, as administrator of "n/el Fustilo, con0inces this court that he is
not a fit %erson to be administrator of this estate and that he has not in fact
administered it so far 'ith due re/ard to the ri/hts of other %ersons in interest. -t is the
o%inion of the court, therefore, that he should be remo0ed and re:uired to render his
accounts as administrator. =o'e0er, to order the forfeiture of the bond of the
administrator 'ould be %remature.
R%L& 82 S&! 2-4
3456"L&S 7S. "3%$5"L)4
&"$SJ his is an intestate %roceedin/ of the estate of Fonzales Kda. de &a0is. he
court a%%ointed #eatriz &. Fonzales and eresa (lbes as coadministratrices of the
estate of Fonzales Kda. de &a0is.
;hile #eatriz 'as in the CS, (lbes filed a motion to remo0e the former as co8
administratri5, on the /round that she is inca%able or unsuitable to dischar/e the trust
and had committed acts and omissions detrimental to the interest of the estate and
the heirs.
he court issued an (rder re:uirin/ #eatriz and the other %arties to file their
o%%osition. (nly "sterio &a0ia o%%osed the remo0al of #eatriz as co8admistratri5, as
the latter 'as still in the Cnited States attendin/ to her ailin/ husband. he )ud/e
cancelled the letters of administration /ranted to #eatriz and retained (lbes as the
administratri5 of the estate. he court reasoned that #eatriz has been absent from the
country as she is in the Cnited States and she has not returned e0en u% to this date
and her remo0al is necessary so that the estate 'ill be administered in an orderly and
efficient manner.
#eatriz mo0ed to reconsider the order. his 'as denied.
#eatriz no' contends that courtDs (rder should be nullified on the /round of /ra0e
abuse of discretion, as her remo0al 'as not sho'n by (lbes to be anchored on any of
the /rounds %ro0ided under Section 2, <ule 32.
=BL9J
9($<-.BJ he court is in0ested 'ith am%le discretion in the remo0al of an
administrator. =o'e0er, the court must ha0e some fact le/ally before it in order to
1ustify a remo0al. here must be e0idence of an act or omission on the %art of the
administrator not conformable to or in disre/ard of the rules or the orders of the court,
'hich it deems sufficient or substantial to 'arrant the remo0al of the administrator.
-n the %resent case, the court a :uo did not base the remo0al of #eatriz as co8
administrratri5 on any of the causes s%ecified in (lbes's motion for relief of #eatriz.
.either did it d'ell on, nor determine the 0alidity of the char/es brou/ht a/ainst
#eatriz by (lbes (lbes.
1. he court based the remo0al of #eatriz on the fact that in the administration
of the estate, conflicts and misunderstandin/s ha0e e5isted bet'een #eatriz and
(lbes 'hich alle/edly ha0e %re1udiced the estate.
$ertainly, it is desirable that the administration of the deceased's estate be marAed
'ith harmonious relations bet'een coadministrators. #ut for mere disa/reements
bet'een such 1oint fiduciaries, 'ithout misconduct, one's remo0al is not fa0ored.
$onflicts of o%inion and 1ud/ment naturally, and, %erha%s ine0itably, occur bet'een
%ersons 'ith different interests in the same estate. Such conflicts, if unresol0ed by the
coadministrators, can be resol0ed by the %robate court to the best interest of the
estate and its heirs.
&urther, the court a :uo failed to find hard facts sho'in/ that the conflict 'ere un1ustly
caused by #eatriz, or that #eatriz 'as /uilty of incom%etence in the fulfillment of her
duties, or %re0ented the mana/ement of the estate accordin/ to the dictates of
%rudence, or any other act or omission sho'in/ that her continuance as co8
administratri5 of the estate materially endan/ers the interests of the estate.
2. he court remo0ed #eatriz also on the /round that she had been absent
from the country.
-n her motion for reconsideration, #eatriz e5%lained that her absence from the country
'as due to the fact that she had to accom%any her ailin/ husband to the CS. "lso,
#eatriz's absence from the country 'as Ano'n to (lbes, and that the latter and
#eatriz had continually maintained corres%ondence 'ith each other 'ith res%ect to the
administration of the estate durin/ #eatriz's absence. "s a matter of fact, #eatriz,
'hile in the CS, sent (lbes a letter addressed to the Land #anA authorizin/ her
((lbes) to recei0e, and collect the interests accruin/ from the Land #anA bonds
belon/in/ to the estate, and to use them for the %ayment of accounts necessary for
the o%eration of the administration. hese facts sho' that #eatriz had ne0er
abandoned her role as co8administratri5 of the estate nor had she been remiss in the
fulfillment of her duties. Suffice it to state, tem%orary absence in the state does not
dis:ualify one to be an administrator of the estate.
hus, as held in re 2c Lni/ht's ;ill a tem%orary absence from the state on account of
ill health, or on account of business, or for %ur%oses of tra0el or %leasure is not such a
remo0al from the state as to necessitate his remo0al as e5ecutor.
7. &inally, it seems that the court refu/e in the fact that t'o (2) of the other three (7)
heirs of the estate of the deceased ha0e o%%osed the retention or re8a%%ointment of
#eatriz as co8administratri5 of the estate. Suffice it to state that the remo0al of an
administrator does not lie on the 'hims, ca%rices and dictates of the heirs or
beneficiaries of the estate, nor on the belief of the court that it 'ould result in orderly
and efficient administration.
"s the a%%ointment of #eatriz #eatriz &. Fonzales 'as 0alid, and no satisfactory
cause for her remo0al 'as sho'n, the court a :uo /ra0ely abused its discretion in
remo0in/ her. Stated differently, #eatriz #eatriz &. Fonzales 'as remo0ed 'ithout 1ust
cause. #eatriz is ordered reinstated as coadministratri5 of said estate.
!48"RR%8$"S 7S. )$645 (S."5$S()
9($<-.B as found in =errera booAJ
he /rounds enumerated by the rule (<32Sec 2) are not e5clusi0e.
hus, 'here the a%%ointment of an administrator 'as %rocured thru false or incorrect
re%resentations, the %o'er of the %robate court to remo0e the a%%ointment on that
/round is beyond :uestion. his is so, because the %osition of the administrator is
one of confidence. (nce the court finds the a%%ointee to the %osition not entitled to
that confidence, it is 1ustified in 'ithdra'in/ the a%%ointment and /i0in/ no 0alid
efficacy thereto.
!"8R$&L 7S. !4%R1 49 "..&"LS an* R48&R14 3"8R$&L
"fter the death of 9omin/o Fabriel, <oberto (son) filed 'ith the <$ 2la a %etition
for letters of administration.
he court belo' issued an order settin/ the hearin/ of the %etition . he court further
directed the %ublication of the order. .o o%%osition ha0in/ been filed des%ite such
%ublication of the notice of hearin/, <oberto 'as allo'ed to %resent his e0idence e5
%arte. hereafter, the %robate court a%%ointed <oberto as administrator of the
intestate estate.
Petitioners .ilda, B0a, #oy, Feor/e, <osemarie, and 2aribel, all surnamed Fabriel,
filed their 6(%%osition and 2otion6 %rayin/ for the recall of the letters of administration
issued to <oberto and the issuance of such letters instead to %etitioner .ilda Fabriel,
as the le/itimate dau/hter of the deceased, or any of the other o%%ositors 'ho are the
herein %etitioners. Petitioners alle/ed that (1) they 'ere not duly informed by
%ersonal notice of the %etition for administrationI (2) %etitioner .ilda Fabriel, as the
le/itimate dau/hter, should be %referred o0er <obertoI (7) <oberto has a conflictin/
and4or ad0erse interest a/ainst the estate because he mi/ht %refer the claims of his
mother and (@) most of the %ro%erties of the decedent ha0e already been relin:uished
by 'ay of transfer of o'nershi% to %etitioners and should not be included in the 0alue
of the estate sou/ht to be administered by <oberto.
he %robate court denied the o%%osition of %etitioners.
=BL9JCnder the <ules, the 'ido' is %referred as administrator because she is
su%%osed to ha0e an interest therein as a %artner in the con1u/al %artnershi%. Cnder
the la', the 'ido' 'ould ha0e the ri/ht of succession o0er a %ortion of the e5clusi0e
%ro%erty of the decedent, aside from her share in the con1u/al %artnershi%. &ailure to
a%%ly for letters of administration for thirty (70) days after the decedent's death is not
sufficient to e5clude the 'ido' from the administration. -n the case at bar, there is no
com%ellin/ reason sufficient to dis:ualify &elicitas )ose8Fabriel from a%%ointment as
administratri5 of the decedent's estate.
(<CLB 32 Sec 2)
(n the other hand, the a%%ointment of <oberto should not be nullified. he
determination of a %erson's suitability for the office of 1udicial administrator rests, to a
/reat e5tent, in the sound 1ud/ment of the court e5ercisin/ the %o'er of a%%ointment
and said 1ud/ment is not to be interfered 'ith on a%%eal unless the said court is
clearly in error. "dministrators ha0e such a ri/ht and corres%ondin/ interest in the
e5ecution of their trust as 'ould entitle them to %rotection from remo0al 'ithout 1ust
cause. hus, Section 2 of <ule 32 %ro0ides the le/al and s%ecific causes authorizin/
the %robate court to remo0e an administrator.
9($<-.BJ " mere im%ortunity by some of the heirs of the deceased, there bein/ no
factual and substantial bases therefor, is not ade:uate ratiocination for the remo0al of
<oberto. Suffice it to state that the remo0al of an administrator does not lie on the
'hims, ca%rices and dictates of the heirs or beneficiaries of the estate.
here is no %rohibition on ha0in/ more than one administrator. Cnder both Phili%%ine
and "merican 1uris%rudence, the a%%ointment of coadministrators has been u%held for
0arious reasonsJ
1. to ha0e the benefit of their 1ud/ment and %erha%s at all times to ha0e
different interests re%resented
2. 'here 1ustice and e:uity demand that o%%osin/ %arties or factions be
re%resented in the mana/ement of the estate of the deceased
7. 'here the estate is lar/e or, from any cause, an intricate and %er%le5in/ one
to settle
@. to ha0e all interested %ersons satisfied and the re%resentati0es to 'orA in
harmony for the best interests of the estate
5. 'hen a %erson entitled to the administration of an estate desires to ha0e
another com%etent %erson associated 'ith him in the office.
he S$ ordered that there be a co8administration of the estate by %etitioner &elicitas
)ose8Fabriel and %ri0ate res%ondent <oberto Fabriel.
7)". )& 8"!"L$53 7S. L"3%)"
La/uda is the re/istered o'ner of residential land in -loilo $ity. 2any years bacA,
%etitioner and her late husband, 9r. #acalin/, 'ith the ac:uiescence of La/uda,
constructed a residential house on a %ortion of said lot %ayin/ a monthly rental.
Cnable to %ay the lease rental for more than one year, an action for e1ectment 'as
filed by La/uda a/ainst %etitioner in her ca%acity as 1udicial administratri5 of the estate
of her late husband. he filin/ of said case s%a'ned 0arious court suits.
he %etitioner entered into a com%romise a/reement ('hich 'as a%%ro0ed by the
court) 'ith La/uda (on the e1ectment case). Said a/reement %ro0ides amon/ others
that u%on failure of defendant to com%ly 'ith any %ro0ision of the amicable settlement
'ithin fifty (50) days the %laintiff shall be entitled to 'immediate e5ecution to restore
%laintiff in %ossession of the %remises and to reco0er all the un%aid monthly rents.
&or failure of the %etitioner to satisfy the conditions of the settlement 'ithin the 508day
%eriod, La/uda mo0ed for e5ecution 'hich the $ourt /ranted.
Petitioner mo0ed to :uash the 'rit of e5ecution. 9enied. " s%ecial order of demolition
'as issued u%on the motion of La/uda.
Petitioner claims that since she 'as no lon/er the 1udicial administratri5 of the estate
of her late husband, 9r. <amon #acalin/, and 'as no lon/er in control of estate funds
'hen the sti%ulated obli/ations in the amicable settlement became due and %ayable,
the s%ecial order of demolition could not be enforced.
=BL9J 9($<-.BJ Such a 0ie' is not tenable. Cnder Section 7, <ule 32 of the
<ules of $ourt, %etitioner's la'ful acts before the re0ocation of her letters of
administration or before her remo0al shall ha0e the same 0alidity as if there 'as no
such re0ocation or remo0al. -t is elementary that the effect of re0ocation of letters
testamentary or of administration is to terminate the authority of the e5ecutor or
administrator, but the acts of the e5ecutor or administrator, done in /ood faith %rior to
the re0ocation of the letters, 'ill be %rotected, and a similar %rotection 'ill be
e5tended to ri/hts ac:uired under a %re0ious /rant of administration.
84RR4:&4 7S. 84RR4:&4
2a5imo #orromeo died lea0in/ his 'ido' )ohanna =ofer #orromeo, and a 'ill
'herein he desi/nated the #orromeo #ros. Bstate -nc. as his sole heir and namin/ his
brother $anuto as e5ecutor.
Proceedin/s ha0in/ been instituted, the $&- %robated the 'ill and /ranted letters
testamentary to $anuto.
hereafter, the attorneys for the 'ido' submitted an 6Cr/ent 2otion6 'hereby they
%rayed for the remo0al of $anuto on the /rounds of ne/li/ence in the %erformance of
his duties and unfitness to continue dischar/in/ the %o'ers of the office.
$anuto 'ithdre', 'ithout authority from the court, the amount of P27,+70.7+ from a
1oint current account of $anuto and 2a5imo in #P- and then de%osited P2@,2@@.7+ of
the sum thus 'ithdra'n in the 1oint account of said $anuto and his brother B5e:uiel.
he court, for se0eral reasons, one of them the unauthorize 'ithdra'al of funds,
decreed the remo0al of $anuto. (n motion for reconsideration, $anuto's attorney
%rayed that the order be re0oAed or that at least, $anuto be %ermitted to resi/n.
Later, the court modified its order in the sense that said e5ecutor 'as 6relie0ed of
(instead of remo0ed from) his commitments as such e5ecutor6. .ot'ithstandin/ such
modification $anuto a%%ealed, contendin/ that the modified order should be re0oAed.
=BL9J here is no :uestion that an order remo0in/ $anuto or administrator is
a%%ealable. #ut 'e fail to %ercei0e the utility of the instant a%%eal inasmuch as $anuto
be//ed to be %ermitted to resi/n and the court all but /ranted his re:uest. $anuto /ot
substantially 'hat he 'anted.
-n any e0ent, su%%osin/ he 'as remo0ed, there 'ere sufficient /rounds therefor. (ne
of 'hich 'as the unauthorized 'ithdra'al. "ttem%tin/ to 1ustify his attitude, $anuto
%oints out that, accordin/ to the 1oint de%osit a/reement B5hibit = si/ned by $anuto
and 2a5imo #orromeo.
Gthat all the moneys, interest, di0idends and credits thereon shall be the %ro%erty of all
of us as 1oint o'ners and shall be %ayable to and collectible by anyone of us, durin/
our lifetimes and after the death of any one of us shall be the sole %ro%erty of and
%ayable to the sur0i0ors, or sur0i0or, %ro0ided that this last de%osition is not contrary
to %ro0isions of la's no' in force or may hereafter be in force in the Phili%%ine
-slands.6
=e claims, in effect, that the money de%osited 'as his at the time he 'ithdre' it.
=o'e0er, the banA only allo'ed him because he 'as the e5ecutor. hus, he should
ha0e Ae%t it in his account as e5ecutor.
&urthermore, and this is im%ortant, the a/reement says %ro0ided that this last
dis%osition is not contrary to %ro0isions of la's no' in force M M M in the P.-.6 "nd
under "rt. 1@17 of the $i0il $ode, no alienation or a/reement 'hich the husband may
maAe 'ith res%ect to con1u/al %ro%erty in fraud of the 'ife shall %re1udice her or her
heirs. here is at least some /round to doubt 'hether the sti%ulation could de%ri0e
the 'ife of her share in the con1u/al assets. he 0alidity of the a/reement could
%ro%erly be the sub1ect of debate in courtI yet this e5ecutor a0oided or by%assed
1udicial ad1udication by /ettin/ the money.
Second reason. $anuto omitted to include in his re%ort, as income of the estate, the
sum 'hich he, had recei0ed from =acienda Plaridel. &urther, he recei0ed other sums
as %roceeds from the farm of the deceased, but instead of de%ositin/ them in his
name as e5ecutor, %laced them in his 1oint account 'ith his brother B5e:uiel.
hird reason. $anuto claimed as his o'n certain shares of the -nterisland Fas
Ser0ice in the name of 2a5imo, assertin/ that 2a5imo 'as merely his 6dummy6.
$onflict bet'een the interest of the e5ecutor and the interest of the deceased is
/round for remo0al or resi/nation of the former, 'ho 'as thereby become unsuitable
to dischar/e the trust. (Section 2, <ule 37.)
6<easons for rule.88'"n e5ecutor is a :uasi trustee, 'ho should be indifferent bet'een
the estate and claimants of the %ro%erty, e5ce%t to %reser0e it for due administration,
and 'hen his interest conflicts 'ith such ri/ht and duty the county court, in the
e5ercise of a sound discretion, may remo0e him.'
-t becomes unnecessary to e5amine the other reasons 'hich induced the trial court to
let this e5ecutor /o. he record discloses sufficient data 1ustifyin/ the order.
9($<-.BJ &urther, it is a settled %rinci%le that an a%%ellate court is disinclined to
interfere 'ith the action taAen by the %robate court in the matter of the remo0al of an
e5ecutor or administrator unless %ositi0e error or /ross abuse of discretion is sho'n.
Ru-e 83, Se0t+on 1
!ase 5u;ber 1' !/ua 1an vs. )e- Rosar+o (40tober 2, 1932)
&unds belon/in/ to the late $hua Piaco 'ere deli0ered to his ado%ted son,
$hua oco, by 'ay of trust. Santa )uana, the administrati5 of the estate of the
deceased father, sou/ht to secure an accountin/ of funds a/ainst del <osario, the
administrati5 of the estate of the deceased son. he latter refused to render an
accountin/ of said funds. " %re0ious $&- 1ud/ment (ci0il case 25,+,) dismissed the
%laintiffsD com%laint and absol0ed del <osario of the com%laint. (n a%%eal, the
%laintiffs alle/ed that the $ erred in sustainin/ del <osarioDs defense of res 1udicata
on the /round that the S$ already decided the case. #efore the S$ decided on the
:uestion as to 'ho o'ns the sum of money in0ol0ed, the :uestion of %rocedure88
;(. there 'as res 1udicata88 'as resol0ed first.
-SSCBJ ;(. there 'as res 1udicata. (?BS).
=BL9J #ut there is a need to determine first if there is (1) identity of %arties, (2)
sub1ect matter, and (7) cause of action.
(1) -dentity of %artiesJ
-n case 25,+, the %laintiff 'as Santa )uana, and the defendant 'as del
<osario. -n the %resent case the %laintiffs are the %resum%ti0e heirs of the late
$hua Piaco and the defendant is del <osario. Cnder the la', the 1udicial
administrator is the le/al re%resentati0e not only of the testate or intestate estate,
but also of the creditors, and heirs and le/atees, inasmuch as he re%resents their
interest in the estate of the deceased.
Santa )uana, as administratri5 of the estate of $hua Piaco, 'as the le/al
re%resentati0e not only of said estate but also of its creditors and heirs. -n 0ie' of
this relation of a/ent and %rinci%al bet'een her and the %laintiffs in the %resent
case, the decision rendered a/ainst Santa )uana, as administratri5, in the former
case is conclusi0e and bindin/ u%on said %laintiffs in the %resent case, in
accordance 'ith sec 70* of the $ode of $i0il Procedure.
;ith reference to the 2art+es 2-a+nt+<<s, while there is no real identity
between the plaintiff in case 25797 and the plaintiffs in the present case,
nevertheless, there exists between them the re-at+on o< -e,a- re2resentat+on by
virtue of which the decision rendered in such case against the former binds the
latter.
;ith res%ect to the 2art+es *e<en*ant, there is no :uestion that the
defendant in the first case is the same in the %resent and a%%ears in the same
ca%acity.
(2) -dentity of sub1ect matterJ
-n the former case the %etition 'as for the renderin/ of an accountin/ of
certain funds alle/ed to ha0e been deli0ered in trust by the father to his ado%ted
son. =ere, the %etition is for the %artition of those same funds and their fruits
bet'een the heirs of both deceased. hus, the sub1ect matter of the liti/ation is
the same and there is %erfect identity of sub1ect matter.
(7) -dentity of cause of actionJ
-n the former case and as in this case, the %laintiffs include the same
allegation of trust, and the defendant maAes the same denial, e5ce%t that instead
of a rendition of accounts, the %artition of said funds and the %roducts thereof is
asAed. he cause of action in the former case is thus identical 'ith the cause of
action in the %resent case, and is %redicated on one and the same alle/ed ri/ht
of action arisin/ out of an alle/ed trust, and the same /eneral denial and s%ecial
defense.
"lthou/h the relief sou/ht, the rendition of accounts in the former case, is
different from the relief sou/ht in the %resent case, 'hich is the %artition of funds,
but the :uestion at issue (u%on the determination of 'hich de%ended the /rantin/
or denial of such relief), is the same, 'hether $hua Piaco or $hua oco 'as the
o'ner of said funds. here is +*ent+ty o< +ssue, u%on 'hich de%ends the
/rantin/ or denial of the relief sou/ht in each of said cases, and this issue has
been im%liedly decided in the former case.
" final 1ud/ment u%on the merits rendered a/ainst the 1udicial administratri5
of an intestate estate, as such, in a case 'here she is %laintiff and the
administratri5 of another intestate estate, as such, is the defendant, in 'hich she
seeAs to secure an accountin/ of funds alle/ed to ha0e been deli0ered in trust by
the deceased, re%resented by the %laintiff administratri5, to the other deceased,
re%resented by the defendant administratri5, 0onst+tutes res =u*+0ata in another
case 'here the heirs of the alle/ed donor are %laintiffs and the administratri5 of
the su%%osed trustee is defendant, and in 'hich the %artition of the same funds
and the %roducts thereof is sou/ht bet'een the heirs of both, under the same
alle/ation of trust, the alle/ed trustee bein/ the ado%ted child of the donor.
Ru-e 83, Se0t+on 1
!ase 5u;ber 2' )e Leon vs !"
9e Leon 'as the administrati5 of the estate of his father. 9e Leon had @ other
siblin/s. =er brother, <amon, filed a G2otion for $ollationE claimin/ that their father
durin/ his lifetime /a0e them by /ratuitous title real %ro%erties 'hich 9e Leon failed to
include in the in0entory of their fatherDs estate. C%on courtDs order, <amon filed an
"mended 2otion for $ollation 'ith su%%ortin/ documents. his ne' list ho'e0er 'as
the same as the first one filed e5ce%t for %ro%erties listed in -tems * and , (statin/ that
a son, "ntonio, recei0ed certain real %ro%erties). he court issued an (rder actin/ on
the "mended 2otion for $ollation (the dis%uted order in this case) and instructed 9e
Leon to include certain %ro%erties in the %robate %roceedin/s. 9e Leon filed 2<
statin/ that the %ro%erties 'ere already titled in their names years a/o and that the
same cannot be collaterally attacAed in a motion for collation. he <$ denied the
motion. 9e Leon filed 2< but this 'as o%%osed by <amon. 9e Leon filed certiorari
'ith the $". $" said that the assailed (rder be0a;e <+na- for failure of %etitioners to
a%%eal the order.
-SSCBJ ;(. the assailed order became final. (.().
=BL9J Partly meritorious.
$ontrary to $"Ds findin/ the assailed (rder is merely interlocutory. he decision
'as contrary to 1uris%rudence. Cnder the cases cited, any a//rie0ed %arty, or a third
%erson may brin/ an ordinary action for the final determination of the conflictin/
claims.
"s stated in Farcia 0s Farcia, GNNNOshould an heir or person interested in the
properties of the a deceased person duly call the courts attention to the fact that
certain properties, rights or credits have been left out in the inventory, it is likewise the
courts duty to hear the observations, with power to determine if such observations
should be attended to or not and if the properties referred to therein belong PRIMA
FACIE to the intestate, but to no such determination is final and ultimate in nature as
to the ownership of the said properties.E
" %robate court 'hether testate or intestate, can only %ass u%on :uestions of title
%ro0isionally. he rationale is stated in )imenez 0s $"J GThe patent reason is the
probate courts limited urisdiction and the principle that !uestions of ownership or title
which resulting the exclusion or inclusion from the inventory of the property, can only
be settled in a separate action"#
he assailed (rder 'as erroneously referred to as an (rder of collation both by
the <$ and the $". &or all intents and %ur%oses, said (rder 'as a mere order
includin/ the sub1ect %ro%erties in the in0entory (order of inclusion). he motion for
collation 'as filed 'ith the %robate court at the early sta/e of the estate %roceedin/s.
he debts of the decedents 'ere not yet %aid nor the net remainder of the con1u/al
estate determined. he issue on collation then 'as still %remature. "ssumin/ the
(rder 'as a final order, it is a hornbooA doctrine that a final order is a%%ealable.
Ru-e 83, Se0t+ons 2-3
!ase 5u;ber 1' 8a0/ra0/ vs Se+<ert (Se2te;ber 20, 1949)
he 'ill of B.2. #achrach %ro0ided for the distribution of his %ro%erties. =e
de0ised to his 'ife (2ary) for life all the fruits and usufruct of the remainder of his
estate after %ayment of le/acies, be:uests and /iftsI that u%on the 2aryDs death H of
the estate should /o to charitable hos%itals and the other H shall be di0ided bet'een
#achrachDs -e,a- /e+rs, to the e5clusion of his brothers. he 'ido' 'as the e5ecutri5
of the estate. Subse:uently, the @ -e,a- /e+rs filed a %etition ('hich 'as /ranted)
asAin/ that 2ary be authorized to %ay them a monthly allo'ance, until they recei0e
their share of the estate u%on her death, 'hich 'ould be deducted from the share of
the estate. &rom )uly 1+@0 to 9ecember 1+@1, 2ary made the %ayments as ordered.
9urin/ the )a%anese occu%ation %ayments 'ere sus%ended. Payments 'ere resumed
from "u/ust 1+@5 to )anuary 1+@,. hereafter, 2ary declined to maAe further
%ayments. he heirs %etitioned for a 'rit of e5ecution, %rayin/ that 2ary %ay the
allo'ances in arrears. his 'as denied and so they filed for mandamus in the S$. S$
/ranted mandamus.
-n the meantime, 2ary filed a %etition recommendin/ the li:uidation of the assets
of the estate destined for charity. She alle/ed that she had already %aid the heirs and
that the allo'ances %aid to them 'ere taAen from the income of the estate 'hich
belong exclusively to her as a usufructuary, (meanin/ the allo'ances %aid 'ere
ad0ances from her %ersonal funds). She said that unless the heirs /i0e security, the
142 of the estate %ertainin/ to them (consistin/ of shares of stock$, may not be
sufficient to reimburse her estate after her death. She %rayed that she be relieved
from the obligation to pay the heirs allowances and that she be authori%ed to sell the
assets&&the '(2 destined for the heirs&&to enable her to continue the payment of
allowances.
he $, actin/ on the 2 %etitions, said that %endin/ the determination of the
%roceedin/s, it ad0ised the sale of %ro%erties destined for charity ".9 also those of
the heirs. he heirs a%%ealed.
-SSCBJ ;(. the lo'er court erred in orderin/ the sale. (?BS).
"ccordin/ to the S$ decision in the mandamus case, 2ary had in her %osesssion
the sum of P751,11* 'hich 'ere ad1udicated to and belon/ed, althou/h %ro indi0iso,
to the heirs and that the monthly allo'ances bein/ %aid to the heirs or due them
should be %aid from this sum and not from the personal funds of the )ary. his cash
in 2aryDs %ossession corres%ondin/ to the 142 of the estate ad1udicated to the heirs is
sufficient for the allo'ances bein/ %aid to the heirs and that the sale of the 142 of the
estate corres%ondin/ to them is not needed.
he main ob1ection of the heirs to the sale of 142 of the estate ad1udicated to
them (besides the cash already mentioned, consists mostly of shares of stocA) is that
said shares if sold may not command a /ood %rice and that said heirs %refer to Aee%
said shares intact as lon/ as there is no real necessity for their sale.
2ary 'ould then ha0e a ri/ht and reason to refuse the %ayment of said
allo'ances from her said %ersonal funds or from the fruits of the estate, 'hich as a
usufructuary, belon/ to her durin/ her lifetime. #ut, until that %oint is reached, the S$
sa' no 0alid reason for orderin/ the sale of the 142 of the estate belon/in/ to the heirs
o0er their ob1ection.
!ase 5u;ber 2' &state o< Ru+z vs. !" (>anuary 29, 1996)
=. <uiz e5ecuted a holo/ra%hic 'ill namin/ as his heirs his only son, Bdmond,
his ado%ted dau/hter, P< 2aria 2ontes, and his 7 /randdau/hters, all children of
Bdmond. he testator be:ueathed cash, %ersonal and real %ro%erties and named
Bdmond e5ecutor. ;hen =. <uiz died, the cash 'as distributed amon/ Bdmond and
P<s accordin/ to the 'ill. (ne of the %ro%erties of the estate P a house and lot at Kalle
Kerde -K, 'hich the testator be:ueathed to the /randdau/hters, 8 'as leased out by
Bdmond to third %ersons. he court ordered Bdmond to de%osit the rental %ayments
totallin/ P5@0L as one8year lease of the %ro%erty. -n com%liance, Bdmond turned o0er
cash but only P7@3,537.
B0entually, the court a%%ro0ed BdmondDs motion for the release of P50L to %ay
the real estate ta5es of the estate. Bdmond filed another 2otion for <elease of &unds.
2ontes o%%osed. She %rayed for the release of the rent %ayments to the
/randdau/hters and for the distribution of the Kalle Kerde %ro%erty and the #lue <id/e
a%artments in accordance 'ith the 'ill. he court /ranted 2ontes' motion. he court,
ho'e0er, delayed the release of the titles.
Bdmond 'as ordered to submit an accountin/ of the e5%enses for administration
includin/ %ro0isions for the su%%ort of the /randdau/hters. Petitioner a%%ealed to the
$". $" sustained the court's order.
-SSCBJ ;(. the %robate court, after admittin/ the 'ill to %robate but before %ayment
of the estate's debts and obli/ations, has the authorityJ (1) to /rant an allo'ance from
the funds of the estate for the su%%ort of the /randchildrenI (2) to order the release of
the titles to certain heirsI and (7) to /rant %ossession of all %ro%erties of the estate to
the e5ecutor of the 'ill. (.().
=BL9J
<BJ Q1J Se0 3, Ru-e 83 o< t/e Ru-es o< !ourt is controllin/. Petitioner alle/es
that this %ro0ision only /i0es the 'ido' and the minor or inca%acitated children of the
deceased the ri/ht to recei0e allo'ances for su%%ort durin/ the settlement of estate
%roceedin/s. =e contends that the /randdau/hters do not :ualify for an allo'ance
because they are not inca%acitated and are no lon/er minors but of le/al a/e, married
and /ainfully em%loyed. -n addition, the %ro0ision e5%ressly states 6children6 of the
deceased 'hich e5cludes the latter's /randchildren. $t +s sett-e* t/at a--o?an0es <or
su22ort un*er Se0t+on 3 o< Ru-e 83 s/ou-* not be -+;+te* to t/e @;+nor or
+n0a2a0+tate*@ 0/+-*ren o< t/e *e0ease*. "rt+0-e 188 (no? "rt 133 o< t/e 9a;+-y
!o*e) o< t/e !+v+- !o*e, t/e substant+ve -a? +n <or0e at t/e t+;e o< t/e testatorAs
*eat/, %ro0ides that durin/ the li:uidation of the con1u/al %artnershi%, the deceased's
le/itimate s%ouse and children, re/ardless of their a/e, ci0il status or /ainful
em%loyment, are entitled to %ro0isional su%%ort from the funds of the estate. he la'
is rooted on the fact that the ri/ht and duty to su%%ort, es%ecially the ri/ht to
education, subsist e0en beyond the a/e of ma1ority. #e that as it may, /randchildren
are not entitled to %ro0isional su%%ort from the funds of the estate. he la' clearly
limits the allo'ance to 6'ido' and children6 and does not e5tend it to the
/randchildren, re/ardless of their minority or inca%acity. -t 'as error for the $" to
sustain the %robate court's order /rantin/ an allo'ance to the /randchildren of the
testator %endin/ settlement of his estate.
<BJ Q 2J he lo'er courts also erred 'hen they ordered the release of the titles
of the %ro%erties to P<s. "n order releasin/ titles to %ro%erties of the estate amounts
to an ad0ance distribution of the estate 'hich is allo'ed on-y under the conditions
under < 10+ Sec 2 in relation to < +0 (Aindly read the rulesI this is not under <ule 37
any'ayI the other issues in0ol0e <+0 and <3@).
!ase 5u;ber 2' Santero vs. !9$ o< !av+te (Se2te;ber 14, 198)
Petitioners are the children of the late Pablo Santero 'ith &eli5berto Pacursa.
P<s are @ of the , children of Pablo 'ith "nselma 9iaz. #oth sets of children are the
natural children of Pablo since neither of their mothers, 'as married to him. #efore the
S$ could act on the instant %etition for certiorari, P<s filed a 2otion for "llo'ance to
include 7 other siblin/s of the P<s and %rayin/ that the administrator deli0er the sum
of P*L to each of the , children of "nselma as their allo'ance from the estate of
Pablo. he $&- /ranted the motion of the P<s but o%%ositors (%etitioners herein)
asAed the court to reconsider said (rder. "n "mended (rder 'as issued by the $&-
directin/ "nselma to submit her e5%lanation as to the additional 7 children. "nselma in
her 6$larification6 stated that in her %re0ious motions, only the last @ minor children as
re%resented by her 'ere included in the motion for support, and her first 7 children
'ho 'ere then of a/e should ha0e been included since all her children ha0e the ri/ht
to recei0e allo'ance as ad0ance %ayment of their shares in the inheritance of Pablo
under "rt. 133 of the .e' $i0il $ode. Petitioners o%%osed the inclusion of 7 more
heirs. "nother (rder 'as issued by the $&- directin/ the administrator to /et bacA the
allo'ance of the 7 additional children of "nselma a%%arently based on the o%%ositors'
2otion.
-SSCBJ
;(. the $&- acted 'ith F"9LB) in /rantin/ the allo'ance to P<sJ
=BL9J $ertiorari dismissed.
Petitioners ar/ue that P<s are not entitled to any allo'ance since they ha0e
already attained ma1ority a/e, t'o are /ainfully em%loyed and one is married as
%ro0ided for under Se0. 3 Ru-e 93, o< t/e Ru-es o< !ourt. Petitioners also alle/e
that there 'as misre%resentation on the %art of the /uardian in asAin/ for
allo'ance for school e5%enses because these 'ards ha0e already attained
ma1ority a/e so that they are no lon/er under /uardianshi%.
1/e 0ontro--+n, 2rov+s+on o< -a? +s not Ru-e 83, Se0. 3 of the <ules of
$ourt but "rts. 2+0 and 133 of the $i0il $ode. he fact that P<s are of a/e,
/ainfully em%loyed, or married is of no moment and should not be re/arded as
the determinin/ factor of their ri/ht to allo'ance under "rt. 133. ;hile the <ules
of $ourt limit allo'ances to the 'ido' and minor or inca%acitated children of the
deceased, the .e' $i0il $ode /i0es the sur0i0in/ s%ouse and his4her children
'ithout distinction. =ence, the P<s Kictor, <odri/o, "nselmina and 2i/uel all
surnamed Santero are entitled to allo'ances as ad0ances from their shares in
the inheritance from their father Pablo. Since the %ro0ision of the $i0il $ode, a
substant+ve -a?, /i0es the sur0i0in/ s%ouse and to the children the ri/ht to
recei0e su%%ort durin/ the li:uidation of the estate of the deceased, such ri/ht
cannot be im%aired by <ule 37 Sec. 7 of the <ules of $ourt 'hich is a %rocedural
rule.
.(BJ 'ith res%ect to 6s%ouse,6 the same must be the 6le/itimate s%ouse6
(not common8la' s%ouses 'ho are the mothers of the children here).
R 84 S 1-3
L%6 !"R4 0. !" an* 8"S$L$" L"(4RR" 7)". )& 8&5$14, "):$5$S1R"1R$B
9"!1S'
"lfredo #enito, 2ario #enito and #en1amin #enito 'ere the ori/inal co8o'ners of t'o
%arcels of land in Sorso/on. 2ario died. Subse:uently, his 'ife, #asilia and father,
Saturnino 'ere subse:uently a%%ointed as 1oint administrators of his estate.
#en1amin sold his one8third undi0ided %ortion to Luz $aro. Subse:uently, 'ith the
consent of Saturnino and "lfredo a subdi0ision title 'as issued to $aro o0er Lot -8$. -n
1+**, #asilia Kda. de #enito learned that $aro bou/ht from #en1amin the said one8
third undi0ided share. She offered to redeem the said share but $aro i/nored her
offer. #asilia thus filed the %resent case to %ro0e that as a 1oint administrator of the
estate of 2ario #enito, she had not been notified of the sale as re:uired by "rticle
1*20 in connection 'ith "rticle 1*27 of the .$$.
he 1ud/e dismissed the com%laint on the /rounds thatJ (a) %ri0ate res%ondent, as
administratri5 of the intestate estate of 2ario #enito, does not ha0e the %o'er to
e5ercise the ri/ht of le/al redem%tion, and (b) #en1amin #enito substantially com%lied
'ith his obli/ation of furnishin/ 'ritten notice of the sale of his one8third undi0ided
%ortion to %ossible redem%tioners. he $" re0ersed.
$SS%&J
;(. the $" erred in allo'in/ the e5ercise of the ri/ht of le/al redem%tion 'ith
res%ect to the lots in :uestion
(&L)J
?es, the $" erred. "s early as 1+*0, co8o'nershi% of the %arcels of land co0ered 'as
terminated 'hen "lfredo, $aro and the -ntestate Bstate of 2ario, re%resented by
administrators Saturnino and re%resentati0e of the heirs of 2ario #enito, a/reed to
subdi0ide the %ro%erty. he title became incontro0ertible after one year from its
re/istration.
B0en if there still is co8o'nershi% and the ri/ht of le/al redem%tion, the administratri5
has no %ersonality to e5ercise said ri/ht for and in behalf of the intestate estate of
2ario #enito. She is on the same footin/ as co8administrator Saturnino #enito.
=ence, if Saturnino's consent to the sale cannot bind the intestate estate of 2ario
#enito on the /round that the ri/ht of redem%tion 'as not 'ithin the %o'ers of
administration, in the same manner, #asilia as co8administrator has no %o'er to
e5ercise the ri/ht of redem%tion of the undi0ided share sold to a stran/er by one of
the co8o'ners after the death of another because in such case, the ri/ht of le/al
redem%tion only came into e5istence 'hen the sale to the stran/er 'as %erfected and
formed no %art of the estate of the deceased co8o'ner. =ence, that ri/ht cannot be
transmitted to the heir of the deceased co8o'ner. #asilia cannot be considered to
ha0e brou/ht this action in her behalf and in behalf of the heirs of 2ario #enito
because the 1urisdictional alle/ations of the com%laint s%ecifically stated that she
brou/ht the action in her ca%acity as administratri5 of the intestate estate of 2ario
#enito.
&S1"1& 49 ":")&4 :"1%1& 4L"7& 0s. !"
9"!1S'
he estate of "madeo 2atute (la0e ("2() is the o'ner of a %arcel of land in 9a0ao
(($ 082,). South'est "/ricultural 2arAetin/ $or%oration (S"2$() filed a collection
case 'ith the $&- of 9a0ao a/ainst $arlos K. 2atute and 2atias S. 2atute, co8
administrators of the estate of "2(. $arlos and 2atias denied their lacA of Ano'led/e
and :uestioned the le/ality of the claim of S"2$(. he $&- of 2anila directed the
administrators to secure the %robate court's a%%ro0al before enterin/ into any
transaction in0ol0in/ the se0enteen (1,) titles of the estate, of 'hich ($ .o. 082, is
one. he %arties ($&- 9a0ao) submitted to the $" an "micable Settlement 'hereby
($ .o. 082, 'as con0eyed and ceded to S"2$( as %ayment of its claim. he said
"micable Settlement 'as not submitted to and a%%ro0ed by the then $&- of 2anila. -n
1+*,, the $" a%%ro0ed the said "micable Settlement and /a0e the same the
enforceability of a court decision.
$ssue' ;(. the amicable settlement needs to be a%%ro0ed by the %robate court
=BL9J ?BS, the amicable settlement needs to be a%%ro0ed by the %robate court.
he claim of %ri0ate res%ondent S"2$( bein/ one arisin/ from a contract may be
%ursued only by filin/ the same in the administration %roceedin/s in the $&- of 2anila
for the settlement of the estate of the deceased "madeo 2atute (la0eI and the claim
must be filed 'ithin the %eriod %rescribed, other'ise, the same shall be deemed
6barred fore0er.6 (Section 5, <ule 3*, <ules of $ourt).
he %ur%ose of %resentation of claims a/ainst decedents of the estate in the %robate
court is to %rotect the estate of deceased %ersons. hat 'ay, the e5ecutor or
administrator 'ill be able to e5amine each claim and determine 'hether it is a %ro%er
one 'hich should be allo'ed. &urther, the %rimary ob1ect of the %ro0isions re:uirin/
%resentation is to a%%rise the administrator and the %robate court of the e5istence of
the claim so that a %ro%er and timely arran/ement may be made for its %ayment in full
or by %ro8rata %ortion in the due course of the administration, inasmuch as u%on the
death of a %erson, his entire estate is burdened 'ith the %ayment of all of his debts
and no creditor shall en1oy any %reference or %riorityI all of them sha/ share %ro8rata
in the li:uidation of the estate of the deceased.
Section 1, <ule ,7 of the <ules of $ourt, e5%ressly %ro0ides that 6the court first taAin/
co/nizance of the settlement of the estate of a decedent, shall e5ercise 1urisdiction to
the exclusion of all other courts.6 he la' is clear that 'here the estate of the
deceased %erson is already the sub1ect of a testate or intestate %roceedin/, the
administrator cannot enter into any transaction in0ol0in/ it 'ithout %rior a%%ro0al of the
%robate court.
:"%R4 .. :"5"5Q%$L 0s. "11C. !R$S4S14:4 !. 7$LL&3"S
9"!1S'
"s early as 1+*1, Kille/as 'as retained as counsel of record for &eli5 Leon/, one of
the heirs of the late &elomina Rerna, 'ho 'as a%%ointed as administrator of the
estate Bstate of the &elomina Rerna. " lease contract 'as e5ecuted bet'een &eli5
Leon/ and the 6=eirs of )ose Kille/as6 in0ol0in/ su/ar lands of the estate. &eli5 Leon/
'as desi/nated therein as administrator and 6o'ner, by testamentary dis%osition, of
54* of all said %arcels of land..6 2anan:uil, a%%ointed s%ecial administrator after &eli5
Leon/ died, alle/es that o0er a %eriod of 20 years, Kille/as allo'ed lease contracts to
be e5ecuted bet'een his client &eli5 Leon/ and a %artnershi% =-)(S 9B )(SB
K-LLBF"S, of 'hich Kille/as is a %artner, under ini:uitous terms and conditions.
2oreo0er, com%lainant char/es that these contracts 'ere made 'ithout the a%%ro0al
of the %robate court and in 0iolation of "rticles 1@+1 and 1*@* of the ne' $i0il $ode.
-SSCBJ ;(. Kille/as committed acts of misconduct in failin/ to secure the a%%ro0al
of the court in S%ecial Proceedin/s .o. @*0 to the 0arious lease contracts e5ecuted
bet'een &eli5 Leon/ and res%ondent's family %artnershi%.
=BL9J .o. Pursuant to Section 7 of <ule 3@ of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt, a 1udicial
e5ecutor or administrator has the ri/ht to the %ossession and mana/ement of the real
as 'ell as the %ersonal estate of the deceased so lon/ as it is necessary for the
%ayment of the debts and the e5%enses of administration. =e may, therefore, e5ercise
acts of administration 'ithout s%ecial authority from the court ha0in/ 1urisdiction of the
estate. &or instance, it has lon/ been settled that an administrator has the %o'er to
enter into lease contracts in0ol0in/ the %ro%erties of the estate e0en 'ithout %rior
1udicial authority and a%%ro0al.
hus, considerin/ that administrator &eli5 Leon/ 'as not re:uired under the la' and
%re0ailin/ 1uris%rudence to seeA %rior authority from the %robate court in order to
0alidly lease real %ro%erties of the estate, res%ondent, as counsel of &eli5 Leon/,
cannot be taAen to tasA for failin/ to notify the %robate court of the 0arious lease
contracts in0ol0ed herein and to secure its 1udicial a%%ro0al thereto.
R 8# 1-#
8&R5"R)4 .$!"R)"L an* S&8"S1$"5 .$!"R)"L vs. !&545 LL")"S
9a0tsJ #ernardo Picardal entrusted to $enon Lladas a %iece of land at Lanao del
.orte. his land formed %art of the %ro%erties belon/in/ to the con1u/al %artnershi%
bet'een #ernardo and his 'ife, "urea, and 'as under 1udicial administration. he
%ro%erty 'as not yet %artitioned amon/ the heirs. $enon Lladas entered the
landholdin/ and 'as a%%ointed as s%ecial administrator of "urea's estate. Picardal
asAed Lladas to 0acate because of his unsatisfactory %ractices. Lladas then filed a
%etition 'ith $"<. Picardal ans'ered that the landholdin/ in :uestion 'as a %art of
the %ro%erty of the late "urea #ur/os and 'as the sub1ect of administration
%roceedin/s and that they ha0e ne0er notified $enon Lladas to 0acate the %remises,
and that the landholdin/ in :uestion 'as under custodia legis.
Lladas sto%%ed har0estin/ after 2ay 1+*0. Lladas amended his %etition sayin/ that he
had been e1ected from the landholdin/ and that as a result of the e1ectment, he
suffered dama/es in not recei0in/ his share of the %roduce. he $"< and the S$ held
that Lladas had been e1ected
$SS%&J ;(. the estate, 'hich is in the hands of the administratri5 and not 'ith
herein %etitioners, should be liable for the dama/es
(e-*J .o, the estate should not be liable for dama/es.
#ernardo Picardal and Sebastian Picardal 'ere the ones 'ho e1ected $enon Lladas,
accordin/ to the findin/ of the lo'er court. hey, therefore, Should be the ones to
suffer the conse:uences of their unla'ful act.
he Picardals' res%onsibility for the dama/es cannot be shifted to the intestate estate
for the follo'in/ reasonsJ
B0en if it be assumed, gratia argumenti, that the s%ecial administrator ac:uiesced to
the e1ectment, the estate 'ould still not be liable, because if Section 5, <ule 35 of the
<ules of $ourt maAes the administrator himself liable for any 'aste committed in the
estate throu/h his ne/li/ence, 'ith more reason 'ould he be %ersonally res%onsible,
and not the estate, for the conse:uences of his unla'ful act.
he fact that the %roceeds of the landholdin/ in :uestion, as claimed by %etitioners,
'ere turned o0er to the estate, 'ould neither render the estate liable, because the
intestate estate did not really benefit from the dis%ossession.
he intestate estate before %artition is o'ned in common by all the heirs ("rticle 10,3,
$i0il $ode). " co8o'nershi% should not suffer the conse:uences of the unla'ful act of
any of the co8o'ners ("rticle 501, $i0il $ode).
Cnder "13 of the $$, %etitioners themsel0es, and not the intestate estate, should
indemnify the res%ondent for the dama/es suffered by the latter on account of the
unla'ful dis%ossession.
R 8# S 6-
$51&S1"1& &S1"1& 49 !"R:&5 )& L%5" 0s.$"!
-n 1+*@, )ose de Luna Fonzales and former )ud/e <amon -casiano 'ere a%%ointed
co8administrators of the estate of $armen de Luna. )ud/e -casiano died so Fonzales
%erformed his duties as sole administrator of the estate. Fonzales filed a motion for
allo'ances and %ayment of administrator's commission in accordance 'ith Section ,,
<ule 35 of the <ules of $ourt lea0in/ the matter to the discretion of the court.
he $ re:uired the administrator to define the fees he 'as demandin/. )ose de Luna
Fonzales died. =is heirs filed in his behalf an Cr/ent Su%%lemental 2otion for
allo'ances and %ayment of administrator's commission or fees. (ne of the heirs
o%%osed.
he $ directed the ne' administratri5 to submit a com%lete and s'orn in0entory of
all the %ro%erties of the deceased, indicatin/ therein the current 0alues of each and
'ith res%ect to the real %ro%erties, the current assessed and marAet 0alue. he
administratri5 filed the in0entory 'here the total of the real and %ersonal %ro%erty of
the estate 'as listed at P10,,51, 13+.+,.
he $ /ranted 500,000.00 by 'ay of com%ensation of the deceased administrator
)ose de Luna for the ser0ices rendered by him as such administrator of the estate of
$armen de Luna. Subse:uently, the court /ranted the administratri5's motion for
authority to 'ithdra' from banA de%osits and to mort/a/e estate %ro%erties.
$SS%&'
;hether or not )ose de Luna Fonzales is entitled to the amount of P500, 000.00 by
'ay of com%ensation as administrator of the estate of $armen de Luna.
=BL9J ?BS, )ose Fonzales is entitled to 500,000.
he a%%licable %ro0ision is the %ro0iso 'hich statesJ 6in any s%ecial case, 'here the
estate is lar/e and the settlement has been attended 'ith /reat difficulty and has
re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of the e5ecutor or administrator, a
/reater sum may be allo'ed.6 " 'ide latitude, lee'ay or discretion is therefore /i0en
to the trial court to /rant a /reater sum. "nd the determination of 'hether the
administration and li:uidation of an estate ha0e been attended 'ith /reater difficulty
and ha0e re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of the e5ecutor or
administrator rests on the sound discretion of the court 'hich tooA co/nizance of the
estate.
he records of the case is re%lete 'ith e0idence to %ro0e that the late administrator
)ose de Luna Fonzales had taAen /ood care of the estate and %erformed his duties
'ithout any com%laint from any of the heirs.
;hile it may be true that the in0entory of the %ro%erties of the estate as of "%ril 25,
1+,5 'as only P 3+0,3*5.25 it has been sho'n that the 0alue of the estate has
increased not only by the efforts of the late administrator to taAe /ood care of the
same but in succeedin/ to locate other %ro%erties belon/in/ to the estate so that
'hen he submitted the in0entory of the %ro%erties, real and %ersonal of the estate as
of "%ril 17, 1+30 the total a%%raisal thereof a%%ears to be o0er P10 2. .o ob1ection
thereto a%%ears to ha0e been inter%osed.
"S$5"S v. !9$ 49 R4:8L45
&"$SJ -n 1+2*, an a%%lication for the %robate of 'hat %ur%orts to be the 'ill of the
deceased 2auricio "sinas 'as filed in the $&- of <omblon. (%%osition to the 'ill 'as
entered by res%ondent &elisa "sinas, alle/in/ that she is an acAno'led/ed natural
dau/hter of 2auricio "sinas. Since %etitioner $atalina "sinas denied &elisa "sinas'
ri/ht to inter0ene in the %roceedin/ for the %robate of said alle/ed 'ill, the court
%roceeded to determine 'hether said res%ondent is really an acAno'led/ed natural
dau/hter of the deceased.
"fter the hearin/, the court authorized &elisa "sinas to inter0ene in said %robate
%roceedin/ as 'ell as in the administration of the said deceased's state, and /ranted
her, moreo0er, P200 tra0ellin/ e5%enses for herself and her 'itnesses, char/eable to
the funds under administration.
Petitioner $alalina "sinas thus filed this ori/inal %etition for a 'rit of %rohibition a/ainst
the $&- of <omblon and &elisa "sinas.
-SSCBJ ;4. the res%ondent court e5ceeded its 1urisdiction in orderin/ that the
e5%enses incurred by &elisa "sinas' a%%earance in court and that of her 'itnesses be
char/ed to the funds under administration. (?BS)
=BL9J hese e5%enses cannot be considered as administration e5%enses, inasmuch
as they are not necessary either for the mana/ement of the %ro%erty or its %rotection
from destruction of deterioration, or for the %roduction of fruits.
he e5%enses of administration should be those necessary for the mana/ement of the
%ro%erty, for %rotectin/ it a/ainst destruction or deterioration, and %ossibly for the
%roduction of fruitsI but the sum e5%ended by an administrator of an e5tensi0e
administration of the estates of the decedent cannot be considered 6e5%enses of
administration.6
"lthou/h a $&- has 1urisdiction to authorize a 1udicial administrator of a decedent's
estate to maAe certain e5%enses for the benefit of said estate, or to a%%ro0e those
already made, such 1urisdiction is confined to e5%enses strictly necessary for the /ood
mana/ement thereof. hus, res%ondent court e5ceeded its 1urisdiction.
=o'e0er, the res%ondent court's decree 'as final in character and a%%ealable, 'ithout
the necessity of 'aitin/ for the termination of the administration. "s there is another
%lain, s%eedy and ade:uate remedy in the ordinary course of 1ustice, namely, an
a%%eal, %rohibition cannot lie.
he %etition is dismissed.
>4("55&S v. $:.&R$"L
&"$SJ Petitioner, #. B. )ohannes, is the husband of the deceased $armen
heodora )ohannes, 'ho, at the time of her death, 'as a resident of Sin/a%ore, and a
#ritish citizen. Petitioner is liAe'ise a #ritish citizen and resident of Sin/a%ore. "t the
time of her death, $armen had money on de%osit in P.# 2anila.
Petitioner claims that the deceased left no 'ill and that under #ritish la', the husband
of a deceased 'ife is the sole heir, to the e5clusion of all others, of the %ro%erty of his
'ife 'hen she dies intestate
C%on the death of his 'ife, the %etitioner 'as duly a%%ointed as administrator of her
estate by the court at Sin/a%ore. =o'e0er, "lmeida, brother of the deceased and a
resident of the Phili%%ines, 'as a%%ointed as ancillary administrator o0er her
%ro%erties in the Phili%%ines.
-n a se%arate ci0il case, )ohannes then filed a %etition for certiorari and a tem%orary
in1unction, %rayin/ for the annulment of the a%%ointment of 9' "lmeida as ancillary
administrator and for the issuance of an order directin/ the P.# to deli0er to #. B.
)ohannes all of the funds of said deceased, no' on de%osit. C%on a hearin/,
ho'e0er, the S$ dismissed this %etition.
"fter the decision 'as rendered, %etitioner came to 2anila and claims to ha0e
established a tem%orary residence at the 2anila =otel, based u%on 'hich, in le/al
effect, he asAed for an order of court that 9'"lmeida be remo0ed as ancillary
administrator, and that he be a%%ointed.
he $&- denied this %etition, hence this a%%eal, %rayin/ for, amon/ other thin/s, the
%ayment a/ainst the estate for attorneys' fees incurred by the %etitioner.
-SSCBJ ;4. attorney's fees incurred by %etitioner should be char/ed a/ainst the
funds under administration. (.()
=BL9J -t is the duty of the court to %rotect the estate from any ille/al, un1ust, or
unreasonable char/es. "ll claims a/ainst the estate should be for 1ust debts only, or
for the actual e5%enses of administration, and those should be reasonable. .o other
claims should be allo'ed.
-f, as claimed, the real dis%ute here is 'hether the brothers and sisters of the
deceased are entitled to share in her estate, or 'hether the %etitioner only, as the
sur0i0in/ husband, is entitle to all of it, that :uestion is not one of administration, and
any e5%ense and attorneys' fees incurred by either %arty for the settlement of that
:uestion is a %ersonal matter to them, and should not be allo'ed as claims a/ainst
the estate. $laims a/ainst the estate should only be for 1ust debts or e5%ense for
administration of the estate itself.
S%L$1 v. S"514S
&"$SJ his is an a%%eal from orders of the $&- of <izal, disallo'in/ certain items of
the account rendered by the e5ecutor of the estate of the deceased &ruto Santos.
(ne of the contested items is a claim of P500 for attorney's fees, 'hich the trial 1ud/e
reduced to P250. he action of the %residin/ 1ud/e 'as %redicated on the failure of
the e5ecutor to secure authority from the court for the incurrin/ of e5%enses for le/al
ser0ices, and on the fact that some of the ser0ice %erformed by the attorney should
ha0e been %erformed by the e5ecutor %ersonally.
-t is 'ell settled that the $ourt of &irst -nstance has a discretionary ri/ht to fi5
attorney's fees in testamentary %roceedin/s %endin/ before it, and no im%ro%er
misuse of that discretion is here disclosed.
=o'e0er, the trial 1ud/e further refused to %ermit the e5ecutor to secure
reimbursement from the estate for money %aid as %remium on the bond filed by him
as s%ecial administrator, and for the %re%aration, filin/, and substitution of his bond as
such and as e5ecutor of the estate.
-SSCBJ ;4. the e5%enses incurred by an e5ecutor or administrator to %rocure a bond
is a %ro%er char/e a/ainst the estate. (.()
=BL9J he %osition of an e5ecutor or administrator is one of trust. -t is %ro%er for the
la' to safe/uard the estates of deceased %ersons by re:uirin/ the e5ecutor or
administrator to /i0e a suitable bond. he ability to /i0e this bond is in the nature of a
:ualification for the office. he e5ecution and a%%ro0al of the bond constitute a
condition %recedent to acce%table of the res%onsibilities of the trust.
-f an indi0idual does not desire to assume the %osition of e5ecutor or administrator, he
may refuse to do so. (n the other hand, 'hen the indi0idual %rofers an ade:uate
bond and has it a%%ro0ed by the %robate court, he thereby admits the ade:uacy of the
com%ensation 'hich is %ermitted his %ursuant to la'.
he e5%ense incurred by an e5ecutor or administrator to %rocure a bond is not a
%ro%er char/e a/ainst the estate. Section *30 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure does
not authorize the e5ecutor of administrator to char/e a/ainst the estate the money
s%ent for the %resentation, filin/, and substitution of a bond.
Se%arate (%inion
-2PB<-"L, *", concurrin/ and dissentin/ in %artJ
;e concur 'ith the ma1ority in so far as the attorney's fees are concerned. =o'e0er,
a%%ellant should be credited 'ith the sum 'hich he %aid for the %remium, %re%aration,
and filin/ of his bond.
;hile $ode of $i0il Procedure does not e5%ressly authorize the reimbursement, by
'ay of administration e5%enses, of the %remium the administrator or e5ecutor has had
to %ay u%on the bond, the same is true of attorney's fees, and yet 'e ha0e uniformly
held that such fees constitute le/al e5%enses of administration, for 'hich the
administrator is entitled to reimbursement. Since the same reason e5ist (in both
cases), 'e do not see 'hy they should not be decided the same 'ay.
4!!&D" v. :"RQ%&6
&"$SJ Petitioners, "tty. )esus (cceSa and "tty. Samuel (cceSa, are the la'yers for
the estate e5ecutri5, 2rs. .ecitas (/an (cceSa, and they had been re%resentin/ the
said e5ecutri5 since 1+*7, defendin/ the estate a/ainst claims and %rotectin/ the
interests of the estate.
-n order to e5%edite the settlement of ;illiam (/an's estate, the se0en instituted heirs
decided to enter into com%romise 'ith the claimants, as a result of 'hich the total
amount of P220,000.00 in cash 'as a'arded to the claimants, includin/ co8e5ecutor
"tty. -sabelo K. #inamira, his la'yers and his 'ife. " %artial distribution made to the
heirs in the total amount of P@50,000.00.
Petitioners filed a 2otion for Partial Payment of "ttorneys' &ees, asAin/ the court to
a%%ro0e %ayment to them of P70,000.00, as %art %ayment of their fees for their
ser0ices as counsel for the e5ecutri5 since 1+*7, and to authorize the e5ecutri5 to
'ithdra' the amount from the de%osits of the estate and %ay %etitioners.
hree of the heirs mo0ed to defer consideration of the motion until after the total
amounts for the e5ecutri5's fees and the attorney's fees of her counsel shall ha0e
been a/reed u%on by all the heirs. Later, fi0e of the se0en instituted heirs filed 'ith
the court a 2anifestation statin/ that they had no ob1ection to the release of
P70,000.00 to %etitioners as %artial %ayment of attorney's fees and recommendin/
a%%ro0al of %etitioners' motion.
<es%ondent )ud/e issued an order fi5in/ the total fees of %etitioners for the %eriod
2arch, 1+*7 to 9ecember, 1+*5 at P20,000.00. Petitioners mo0ed to reconsider that
order. <es%ondent issued an order not only denyin/ %etitioners' 2otion for
<econsideration but also modifyin/ the ori/inal order by fi5in/ %etitioners' fees for the
entire testate %roceedin/s at P20,000.00.
Petitioners contend that res%ondent )ud/e acted 'ith /adle1 in fi5in/ the entire
attorney's fees to 'hich they are entitled as counsel for the e5ecutri5, and in fi5in/ the
said fees in the amount of P20,000.00.
-n his "ns'er to the %etition, res%ondent )ud/e alle/ed that (a) %etitioners' %ro%er
remedy is a%%eal and not a s%ecial ci0il action, considerin/ that there is already a final
order on the motion for %ayment of feesI (b) %etitioner "tty. Samuel (cceSa is the
husband of e5ecutri5 .ecitas (/an (cceSa, hence, Samuel (cceSa's %ecuniary
interest no' /oes a/ainst the %ecuniary interest of the four heirs he is re%resentin/ in
the s%ecial %roceedin/I (c) there are miscellaneous %ayments a%%earin/ in the
com%romise a/reement and in the e5ecutri5's accountin/ 'hich co0er e5%enses
incurred by %etitioners for the estateI and (e) it is the duty of res%ondent )ud/e not to
be 0ery liberal to the attorney re%resentin/ the e5ecutri5, 'ho is at the same time the
'ife of said counsel and is herself an heir to a sizable %ortion of the estate, for
res%ondent )ud/e's duty is to see to it that the estate is administered 6fru/ally,6 6as
economically as %ossible,6 and to a0oid 6that a considerable %ortion of the estate is
absorbed in the %rocess of such di0ision,6 in order that there may be a 'orthy residue
for the heirs.
-SSCBJ ;4. )ud/e 2ar:uez acted 'ith /adle1 'hen he fi5ed the attorney's fees solely
on the basis of the records of the case, 'ithout allo'in/ %etitioners to adduce
e0idence to %ro0e 'hat is the %ro%er amount of attorney's fees to 'hich they are
entitled for their entire le/al ser0ices to the estate. (?BS)
=BL9J he rule is that 'hen a la'yer has rendered le/al ser0ices to the e5ecutor or
administrator to assist him in the e5ecution of his trust, his attorney's fees may be
allo'ed as e5%enses of administration. he estate is, ho'e0er, not directly liable for
his fees, the liability for %ayment restin/ %rimarily on the e5ecutor or administrator. -f
the administrator had %aid the fees, he 'ould be entitled to reimbursement from the
estate.
here is no :uestion that the %robate court acts as a trustee of the estate, and as
such trustee it should 1ealously /uard the estate under administration and see to it that
it is 'isely and economically administered and not dissi%ated. his rule, ho'e0er,
does not authorize the court, in the dischar/e of its function as trustee of the estate, to
act in a 'himsical and ca%ricious manner or to fi5 the amount of fees 'hich a la'yer is
entitled to 'ithout accordin/ to the latter o%%ortunity to %ro0e the le/itimate 0alue of
his ser0ices. (%%ortunity of a %arty to be heard is admittedly the essence of
%rocedural due %rocess.
-n fi5in/ %etitioners' attorney's fees solely on the basis of the records of the case,
'ithout allo'in/ %etitioners to adduce e0idence to %ro0e 'hat is the %ro%er amount of
attorney's fees to 'hich they are entitled for their entire le/al ser0ices to the estate,
res%ondent )ud/e committed a /ra0e abuse of discretion correctable by certiorari.
he court a !uo is directed to hold a hearin/ to determine ho' much the total
attorney's fees %etitioners are entitled to.
."L$L&4 v. :&5)46"
(9i/est to come later... but here is the case itself...)
9es%ues del fallecimiento de #aldomero $osme, :ue de1o hi1os menores, entre ellos,
la demandada <osario $osme de 2endoza, los ser0icios del abo/ado "urelio Palileo
fueron solicitados con el ob11ecto de :ue tanto los hi1os menores del difunto comno los
bienes :ue de1o estu0iernal al am%aro de la ley. Bl abo/ado Sr. "urelio Palileo
%romo0io entonces, %ara estos fines, la tutela de los hi1os menores del difunto
#aldomero $osme, %romo0io abintestato de este, y, con el fin de :ue el abintestato
%udiera cobrar un credito hi%otecario contra una deudora ya difunta, llamanda
Kictorina orres, %romo0io tambien el abintestato de esta, y, finalmente, contra el
abintestayo Kictorina orres %romo0io el corres%ondiente 1uicio %ara la e1ecucion de la
hi%oteca en fa0or del abintestato de #aldomero $osme. Bn este 1uicio de e1ecucion
de hi%oteca se dicto sentencia contra la deudora en fa0or del abintestato de
#aldomero $osme %ara el %a/o de la dueda y de la cantidad de P1,@00 %or
honorarios de abo/ado.
La %resente accion la entabla el demandante "urelio Palileo contra la demandada,
como administrador del abintestato de #aldomero $osme, %ara cobrar la cantidad de
P2,200, im%orte de sus ser0icios %restados, se/unnse ha dicho antes. Bl )uz/ado de
Primera -nstancia fallo la causa en fa0or del demandante, %ero redu1o a P1,@00 el
im%orte de los honorarios reclamados, deduciendo ademas de esta cantidad la de
P500 :ue la demandad ha %a/ado ya con anterioridad, a cuenta de los mismos
ser0icios.
Bn la causa Bscueta contra Sy8)ullion/ ()ur. &il., tomo 5, @25), este ribunal sento la
doctrina de :ue en los casos como el %resente el acreedor %uede entablar una accion
contra el administrador, como %ersona %articular, el cual, si se dicta sentencia contra
el, %uede incluir en su cuenta, como /asto de administracion, la cantidad :ue a este
efecto haya %a/ado, o, %uede tambien dicho acrredor solicitar en el e5%ediente de
administracion el %a/o de esta cantidad, como /asto de administracion. Bn el
%resente caso el demandante no entabla su accion contra la demandada como
%ersona %articular, sino como administradora 1udicial de los bienes del difunto
#aldomero $osme.
.o %rocede, %or tanto, esta accion, %ero, el demandante %uede solicitar el %a/o de la
cantidad :ue reclama, como, /astos, en el e5%ediente de la administracion de los
bienes del difunto #aldomero $osme. <esulta ademas :ue, de hecho, el
dema:ndante, antes de entablar la %resente accion, ha solicitado ya en dicho
e5%ediente el %a/o de la misma cantidad, hallandose al %resente %endiente de
resolucion dicha solicitud.
Por estas consideraciones se absuel0e a la demandada, sin %er1uicio de la resolucion
:ue se dicte sobre esta misma recamacion del demandante el la administracion de
los bienes del difunto #aldomero $osme, con las costas. "si se ordena.
%C 1$4!4 0s. $:.&R$"L 57 Phil 302
&"$SJ Panis 'as counsel for the administration of the estate of deceased ?an/co.
#efore the final settlement of accounts, he %resented a motion in the %robate
%roceedin/s for the allo'ance of attorney's fees in the sum of P15,000. he 1ud/e
/ranted the motion and allo'ed the fees claimed by Panis.
-SSCBJ ;4. the attorneyDs fees should be %aid from the funds of the estate.
=BL9J he ser0ices for 'hich the fees are bein/ sou/ht 'ere rendered to the
e5ecutor or administrator to assist him in the e5ecution of his trust. he attorney can
therefore not hold the estate directly liable for his fees. he liability for the %ayment
rests on the e5ecutor or administrator, but if the fees %aid are beneficial to the estate
and reasonable, he is entitled to the reimbursement from the estate. Such %ayment
should be included in his accounts and the reimbursement therefore settled u%on the
notice %rescribed in section *32 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure.
>. 3456"L&S-4R&5S& 0s. !" 1*7 S$<" 5,0
&"$SJ (rense 'as retained by "lba to re%resent her in the %robate of her husband's
'ill. =e claimed the sti%ulated attorney's fees e:ui0alent to 10T of the estate but the
%robate court allo'ed him only P20,000.00 on the basis of !uantum meruit" =e filed a
notice of a%%eal from this order, and the %robate court then transmitted the records of
the case to the $". (rense submitted the brief for the a%%ellant. "lba tra0ersed 'ith
her brief for the a%%ellee. =o'e0er, the $" declared (renseDs a%%eal abandoned and
dismissed for his failure to submit his record on a%%eal.
-SSCBJ ;4., 'hen an a'ard of attorney's fees by the %robate court is ele0ated to the
$", a record on a%%eal is necessary.
=BL9J he decisi0e %ro0ision is <ule 10+, Section 1, of the <ules of $ourt. -t is settled
that the fees of the la'yer re%resentin/ the e5ecutor or administrator are directly
char/eable a/ainst the client for 'hom the ser0ices ha0e been rendered and not
a/ainst the estate of the decedent. =o'e0er, the e5ecutor or administrator may claim
reimbursement of such fees from the estate if it can be sho'n that the ser0ices of the
la'yer redounded to its benefit.
"s (renseDs claim for attorney's fees is not a claim a/ainst the estate of "lbaDs
husband, he could ha0e filed it in an ordinary ci0il action, in 'hich e0ent an a%%eal
therefrom 'ill not be re/arded as in0ol0ed in a s%ecial %roceedin/ re:uirin/ the
submission of a record on a%%eal. -t a%%ears, ho'e0er, that it 'as not filed in such
se%arate ci0il action but in the %robate case itself, 'hich is a s%ecial %roceedin/ and
so should be deemed /o0erned by <ule 10+ on a%%eals from such %roceedin/s. he
a%%eal 'ould come under Subsection (e) thereof as the order of the %robate court
/rantin/ the challen/ed attorney's fees 6constitutes, in %roceedin/s relatin/ to the
settlement of the estate of a deceased %erson, or the administration of a trustee or
/uardian, a final determination in the lo'er court of the ri/hts of the %arty a%%ealin/.6
he conse:uence is that the record on a%%eal should be re:uired.
<ule 50, Section 1 %ro0ides that an a%%eal may be dismissed by the $", on its o'n
motion or on that of the a%%ellee, for (b) +ailure to file, 'ithin the %eriod %rescribed by
these rules, the notice of a%%eal, a%%eal bond or record on appeal" (n the basis of
this rule, the resolution of $" dismissin/ (renseDs a%%eal cannot be faulted.
-t is noted, ho'e0er, that the :uestion %resented in this case is one of first im%ressionI
that (rense acted in honest if mistaAen, inter%retation of the a%%licable la'I that the
%robate court itself belie0ed that the record on a%%eal 'as unnecessaryI and that "lba
herself a%%arently thou/ht so, too, for she did not mo0e to dismiss the a%%eal and
instead im%liedly reco/nized its 0alidity by filin/ the a%%ellee's brief. -n 0ie' of these
circumstances, and in the interest of 1ustice, the $ourt feels that (rense should be
/i0en an o%%ortunity to com%ly 'ith the rules by submittin/ the re:uired record on
a%%eal as a condition for the re0i0al of the a%%eal.
$L%:$5")" )& 3"L"-S$S45 0s. :"))&L" *, S$<" @,3
&"$SJ he $&- issued an order directin/ the administratri5 to de%osit 'ith any
re%utable banAin/ institution the remainder of the amount of P@0,+73.5*, 'hich may
be in her %ossession, after deductin/ the e5%enses a%%ro0ed by the court and the
allo'ances and inheritances authorized by the court to be /i0en to the 'ido' and the
heirs of the deceased.
he administratri5 did not com%ly 'ith the order. She contends that she cannot be
com%elled to de%osit in a banA 'hat she no lon/er has, considerin/ that she is entitled
to the deductions 'hich she made from the ori/inal amount, for as administratri5, she
is to be reimbursed for her e5%enditures and to deduct her fees as such administratri5.
She therefore %rayed for the %ayment of P22,000.00 6as the %ayment of her fees as
administratri5.
-SSCBJ ;4. administratri5 -luminada de Fala8Sison may be allo'ed %ayment of
P22,000 for her fees as administratri5.
=eldJ Pursuant to Section , of <ule 35 of the <ules, the administrator may be allo'ed
a /reater or additional sum 6'here the estate is lar/e, and the settlement has been
attended 'ith /reat difficulty, and has re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of
the e5ecutor or administrator6. -t must be noted that the administratri5 is seeAin/ as
her com%ensation an amount /reater than that ordinarily allo'ed under the rules on
the /round that the estate is lar/e, its settlement 6ha0in/ been attended 'ith /reat
difficulty (since 1+@, or almost 1, years a/o) and re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity6.
-n order to entitle the e5ecutor or administrator to additional com%ensation, the estate
must be lar/e, the settlement e5traordinarily difficult, and a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity
demonstrated by him. he amount of his fee in s%ecial cases under the <ules is a
matter lar/ely in the discretion of the %robate court, 'hich 'ill not be disturbed on
a%%eal, e5ce%t for an abuse of discretion. ;hether or not the %robate court abused its
discretion 'ould de%end on the attendant facts.
R4S&514!E vs. &LS&R @3 Phil ,0+
&"$SJ C%on the death of =enry Blser, <osentocA filed a %etition %rayin/ that he be
a%%ointed as e5ecutor of the estate.
<osentocA 'as a%%ointed e5ecutor. =e filed a %etition %rayin/ that he be
allo'ed P1,0004month as com%ensation as administrator of the estate. <osentocA
alle/ed that the 'orA of administerin/ the estate is such as to re:uire an unusual
amount of time, o'in/ to its size and in0ol0ed condition. he said amount had also
been a/reed u%on by all the %arties in the case. he court /ranted the %etition.
he 'ido' of Blser filed a %etition asAin/ that the order be re0oAed and that the
com%ensation of the e5ecutor should be based u%on the %ro0isions of Section *30 of
the $ode of $i0il Procedure. he 1ud/e re0oAed the order and fi5ed the com%ensation
at P@004month.
-SSCBJ ;4. the com%ensation of the e5ecutor could be 0alidly reduced to
P@004month.
=BL9J he order reducin/ the e5ecutorDs fee to P@004month 'as made more than 1+
months after the ori/inal order (allo'in/ a P1,0004month com%ensation) 'as made.
hat is, at the time the last order 'as made, <osentocA had been administerin/ the
affairs of the estate for 1+ months 'ith the ultimate 0ie' of 'indin/ u% and closin/ it. -t
is 0ery im%ortant that 'hate0er reasons may ha0e e5isted for allo'in/ him a
com%ensation of P1,0004month at the time of his a%%ointment ha0e ceased to e5ist.
9urin/ that %eriod, all of the assets and liabilities of the estate should ha0e been
le/ally ascertained and determined. he character and class of 'orA 'hich no'
de0ol0es u%on the e5ecutor is of a 0ery different ty%e and nature than at the time of
a%%ointment. "lthou/h by mutual consent his com%ensation 'as fi5ed at
P1,0004month at the time of a%%ointment, that 'as not a 0alid or bindin/ contract
continuous throu/hout the 'hole administration of the estate. -t 'as al'ays sub1ect to
chan/e and the a%%ro0al of the court, and to either increase or decrease as conditions
mi/ht 'arrant. "t all times the com%ensation of the e5ecutor 'as a matter lar/ely in
the discretion of the %robate court.
$51&S1"1& &S1"1& 49 !"R:&5 )& L%5" 0s. $"! 1,0 S$<" 2@*
&"$SJ Fonzales 'as a%%ointed administrator of the estate of de Luna. ;hen
Fonzales died, his heirs filed in his behalf a motion for allo'ances and %ayment of
administrator's commission asAin/ the amount of P100,000.00. =is heirs a/ain filed a
motion, this time, asAin/ for P500,000.00. he trial court issued an order /rantin/ the
P500,000 com%ensation. $" reduced the amount to P@,712.50.
-SSCBJ ;4. Fonzales is entitled to the amount of P500,000.00 by 'ay of
com%ensation as administrator of the estate of de Luna.
=BL9J he a%%licable %ro0ision is the %ro0iso 'hich statesJ 6in any s%ecial case,
'here the estate is lar/e and the settlement has been attended 'ith /reat difficulty
and has re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of the e5ecutor or
administrator, a /reater sum may be allo'ed.6 " 'ide latitude, lee'ay or discretion is
therefore /i0en to the trial court to /rant a /reater sum. "nd the determination of
'hether the administration and li:uidation of an estate ha0e been attended 'ith
/reater difficulty and ha0e re:uired a hi/h de/ree of ca%acity on the %art of the
e5ecutor or administrator rests on the sound discretion of the court 'hich tooA
co/nizance of the estate. he trial court, in a%%lyin/ this %ro0iso a'arded the sum of
P500,000.00 as administrator's com%ensation.
here a%%ears to be no sound 1ustification 'hy the $" should interfere 'ith the
e5ercise of the trial court's discretion, absent a sho'in/ that the trial court committed
any abuse of discretion in /rantin/ a /reater remuneration to Fonzales. he trial
court's order is based on substantial e0idence and the a%%licable rule.
he records of the case is re%lete 'ith e0idence to %ro0e that the late administrator
Fonzales had taAen /ood care of the estate and %erformed his duties 'ithout any
com%laint from any of the heirs. ;hile it may be true that the in0entory of the
%ro%erties of the estate as of "%ril 25, 1+,5 'as only P 3+0,3*5.25 it has been sho'n
that the 0alue of the estate has increased not only by the efforts of the late
administrator to taAe /ood care of the same but in succeedin/ to locate other
%ro%erties belon/in/ to the estate so that 'hen he submitted the in0entory of the
%ro%erties, real and %ersonal of the estate as of "%ril 17, 1+30 the total a%%raisal
thereof a%%ears to be o0er P10 2. $onsiderin/ the size of the estate and e5tent of the
care /i0en by the administrator, the amount asAed for is not unreasonable and should
therefore be allo'ed.
E"L"F v. $"!
213 S!R" 289 (1992)
his is a %etition for certiorari, %rohibition and mandamus 'ith a %reliminary in1unction
to annul the decision of the -"$ remo0in/ "na Lala' as administratri5 and a%%ointin/
her sister <osa Lala' as the ne' administratri5 of the estate of their father $arlos
Lala'.
$arlos Lala' died intestate in 1+,0. -n 1+,2, a %etition for the issuance of letters of
administration 'as filed. -n 1+,@, the court issued an order a%%ointin/ "na Lala' as
the s%ecial administratri5 of the estate. "na Lala' filed a %reliminary in0entory of the
%ro%erties that came into her %ossession by 0irtue of such a%%ointment. -n 1+,,, the
court issued an order a%%ointin/ "na Lala' as the 1udicial administratri5 of the said
estate and issued the corres%ondin/ Letter of "dminstration after "na Lala' tooA her
oath. -n 1+32, )ose Lim filed a motion asAin/ the court to re:uire "na Lala' to render
an accountin/ of her administration. he court /ranted the motion and issued an order
re:uirin/ "na Lala' to render an accountin/ of her administration. -n 1+37, the court
a/ain issued another order re:uirin/ "na Lala' to render an accountin/ of her
administration 'ith the e5%ress instruction that the order be /i0en to "na Lala'
%ersonally since the order issued in 1+32 'as returned to the court unser0ed.
-n 1+3@, <osa Lala', a siblin/ of "na Lala', alon/ 'ith their other sisters, Pura and
Kictoria filed a %etition to remo0e "na Lala' as the adminstratri5 of their father on the
/round of "naDs ne/li/ence in her duties in failin/ to render an accountin/ of her
administration for more than si5 years, in 0iolation of <ule 35 Sec. 3 of the <ules of
$ourt. hey also %rayed that <osa be a%%ointed instead. he court issued an order
re:uirin/ "na Lala' to render an accountin/ of her administration '4in 70 days. She
'as able to submit the said re:uirin/, claimin/ that the delay in the submission 'as
due to the fact that she did not to 'hom to render an account because the court did
not ha0e a 1ud/e for a considerable len/th of time (the former 1ud/e 'as %romoted to
the $", 'hile the re%lacement died of a cardiac arrest).
he lo'er court decided in fa0or of <osa and her other siblin/s, holdin/ that "na
Lala' 0iolated the %ro0isions of <ule 35 Sec. 3 by failin/ to render an account of her
administration 'ithin one year from the issuance of letters of administration and that
the same is a /round for her remo0al as administratri5, as %ro0ided by <ule 32 sec. 2.
he court a%%ointed <osa Lala' as the ne' administratri5. (n a%%eal, the -"$
affirmed the 1ud/ment of the lo'er court.
-SSCBJ
;(. =B -"$ $(22-B9 F"9LB) -. "&&<-2-.F =B L$DS 9B$S-(.
<B2(K-.F "." L"L"; "S =B "92-.S<"<-N ".9 "PP(-.-.F <(S"
L"L"; "S =B .B; "92-.-S<"<-N>
=BL9J
.(. here 'as no F"9LB) on the %art of the -"$. he <ules of $ourt, under <ule 35
Sec. 3 %ro0ides that the e5ecutor4administrator shall render an accountin/ of his
administration 'ithin one year from the issuance of the Letter of "dministration. his
re:uirement is mandatory, as indicated by the 'ord shall. he only e5ce%tion
reco/nized by the courts is e5tensions in time 'hen there is a delay in %resentin/ the
claims a/ainst the estate or in %ayin/ the debts or dis%osin/ the assets. he said
circumstances are not %resent in the case at bar.
"s to her remo0al under <ule 32 Sec 2, S$ a/reed 'ith the -"$ that the remo0al of
the administratri5 is u%on the discretion of the court a%%ointin/ him, in this case, the
lo'er court. -t is that court that should determine the sufficiency of the /round for the
remo0al of the administrator. he a%%ellate courts seldom interfere 'ith the action
taAen by the %robate courts.
"s to the claim of "na Lala' that she 'as denied due %rocess since no hearin/ 'as
held on her remo0al, S$ held that she 'as not. -t is a fact that se0eral %leadin/s 'ere
filed by the %arties and that sho'ed that the court /a0e her the o%%ortunity to be
heard.
S$ denied "na Lala'Ds %etition.
9"!$5"L v. !R%6 13 S!R" 289 (1992)
9C$' 1(&R& $S 54 :&51$45 49 R%L& 8# S&! 8 $5 1(& !"S&, :%S1 8& "5
47&RS$3(1, 1($S !"S& !45!&R5S .R48"$45, 541 .R48"1&.
5&7&R1(&L&SS, (&R& $S 1(& )$3&S1 49 1(& !"S&'
&"$SJ
his is a %etition for certiorari and mandamus to re0ie' the orders of the $&-, $a%iz
/rantin/ %robation to the 9asals.
Leo%oldo and Sancha &acinal are co8o'ners of a %arcel of land consistin/ of a
fish%ond, situated in $a%iz. " %ortion of the %ro%erty 'as leased to $lodualdo )amora
and Lucina (rbion for a lease term of ten years. C%on the la%se of the lease term, the
&acinals demanded the return of the leased %ro%erty but the lessees refused to
0acate the %ro%erty. he &acinals instituted an action for unla'ful detainer a/ainst the
lessees. he 2unici%al $ourt decided in fa0or of the &acinals and ordered the lessees
(the 9asals, because it seems that )amora had subleased the %ro%erty) to 0acate the
%ro%erty and deli0er the same to the &acinals.
he &acinals re/ained %ossession of the %ro%erty only to be de%ri0ed of the same
a/ain 'hen the )amoras and the 9asals reentered and refused to 0acate the said
%ro%erty. he &acinals brou/ht an action for indirect contem%t of court. he $&- ruled
in fa0or of the &acinals. he 9asals reentered the %ro%erty t'ice, and in one case,
they, to/ether 'ith armed men and P$ soldiers forcibly dro0e the &acinals out of the
%ro%erty. he $" affirmed the decision of the $&- findin/ the 9asals /uilty of indirect
contem%t. he case 'as remanded to the $&- 'here the 9asals filed a %etition for
%robation. he $ourt held that the /rant of %robation 'ill be on the condition that the
%ossession of the %ro%erty 'ill be returned to the &acinals. =o'e0er, on the failure of
the 9asals to com%ly 'ith the said condition, the $&- denied the %etition for %robation.
=o'e0er on 2< by the 9asals, the $&- /ranted %robation on the /round that the
decision of the $" affirmin/ the $&- decision on the indirect contem%t did not mention
that the &acinals 'ere a/ain de%ri0ed of the %ossession of the %ro%erty.
-SSCBJ ;(. =B $&- $(22-B9 F"9LB) ;=B. - F<".B9 P<(#"-(. (
=B 9"S"LS>
=BL9J
?BS.
"lthou/h %ri0ate res%ondents 'ould ordinarily be entitled to %robation after their
con0iction in a contem%t %roceedin/s since they are not e5%ressly dis:ualified under
the %robation la', considerin/ ho'e0er that their con0iction 'as the result of their
continued defiance of the court's order, %ri0ate res%ondents ha0e not sho'n that
re%entance nor a %redis%osition to rehabilitation or reformation 'hich the %robation
la' sou/ht to achie0e. hey ha0e defied the $ourts order not only once or t'ice but
fi0e times, sho'in/ their contem%t and disres%ect for court orders and %rocesses.
<es%ondent 1ud/e should not ha0e /ranted %robation to the %ri0ate res%ondents until
the latter ha0e %ermanently 0acated and deli0ered said %ro%erty to %etitioners
because of %ri0ate res%ondents blatant refusal to obey the final order of the court that
they 'ere cited for indirect contem%t.
o re:uire %etitioners to file another contem%t %roceedin/ a/ainst %ri0ate res%ondents
for subse:uent dis%ossession 'ould not only be time consumin/ but, 'ould %ractically
condone the continuous defiance by %ri0ate res%ondents of a final decision of a court
of record. "s lon/ as %ri0ate res%ondents ha0e not com%lied 'ith the orders of the
$ourt they are in a state of indirect contem%t. hey cannot maAe a mocAery of court
%rocesses and /et a'ay 'ith it.
1%:"53 v. L"3%$496 S!R" 124 (1980)
&"$SJ
-n S%ecial Proceedin/ no. 1+57 in0ol0in/ the estate of the late 9ominador uman/,
his 'ife, 2a/dalena uman/, 'ho is also the adminstratri5 and e5ecutri5 of the 'ill,
filed a %etition to declare the testate %roceedin/s definitely terminated and closed 'ith
res%ect to her and her t'o children, 2elba and .estor. he %etition 'as %remised on
the claim that the said heirs ha0e already recei0ed the %ro%erties ad1udicated to them
and that to be able to transfer the said %ro%erties in their names, there should be an
order from the court declarin/ that the testate %roceedin/s closed 'ith re/ard to the
said heirs. he %etition 'as o%%osed by Fuia . La/uio, another child of 2a/dalena,
on the /round that not all the %ro%erties ad1udicated to them ha0e been deli0ered and
that there could not be a %artial termination of the %roceedin/s. 2a/dalena, the
administratri5 'ithdre' the %etition.
-n the hearin/ of the motion to 'ithdra' the %etition, the administratri5 submitted a
%leadin/ alle/in/ to sho' that the attached recei%ts sho'ed that the corres%ondin/
estate and inheritance ta5es ha0e been %aid and that there is a certification from the
de%uty clerA of court that there is no claim that there are still %ro%erties not /i0en to
Fuia and to her minor children, and that the Fuia had recei0ed the %ro%erties as 'ell
as the di0idends from the shares of stocA, as sho'n in the %ro1ects of %artition. -n this
action, Fuia also asAed the court to re:uire the admninistratri5 to render an
accountin/ of her administration of the estate. he lo'er court ruled in fa0or of the
administratri5 and held that there is no need to render an accountin/ because the final
accountin/ of the administratri5 had already been a%%ro0ed. Fuia filed an 2< but it
'as denied, the court held that FuiaDs acce%tance of the cash di0idends constituted a
'ai0er on her %art to :uestion the correctness of the accountin/ filed by the
administratri5.
-SSCBJ
;(. =B $(C< S=(CL9 ="KB <B!C-<B9 =B "92-.-S<"<-N (
<B.9B< ". "$$(C.-.F (& =B $"S= ".9 S($L 9-K-9B.9S <B$B-KB9
"&B< =B "PP<(K"L (& =B< &-."L "$$(C.-.F>
;(. =B "$$BP".$B (& =B $"S= 9-K-9B.9S #? ". =B-< $(.S-CB9
" ;"-KB< ( 9B2".9 SC$= "$$(C.-.F>
=BL9J
Section 3 of <ule 35 %ro0ides that the 6e5ecutor or administrator shall render an
account of his administration 'ithin one (1) year from the time of recei0in/ letters
testamentary or of administration M M M, and be shall render such further accounts as
the court may re:uire until the estate is 'holly settled.6
-n the instant case, further accounts by the e5ecutri5 a%%ear to be in order, in 0ie' of
the fact that the di0idends sou/ht to be accounted for are not included in the final
accounts rendered by the e5ecutri5. -t a%%ears that the interests of all the %arties 'ill
be better ser0ed and the conflict bet'een %etitioners and res%ondent 'ill be resol0ed
if such additional accountin/ is made. &urther, 6it has been held that an e5ecutor or
administrator 'ho recei0es assets of the estate after he has filed on account should
file a su%%lementary account thereof, and may be com%elled to do so, but that it is
only 'ith res%ect to matters occurrin/ after the settlement of final account that
re%resentati0es 'ill be com%elled to file su%%lementary account.6
S$ held that the e5ecutor4administrator should account for his recei%ts and
disbursements subse:uent to his last accountin/.
"s to the alle/ed 'ai0er, S$ held that the said acce%tance does not constitute a
'ai0er. he duty of an e5ecutor or administrator to render an account is not a mere
incident of an administration %roceedin/ 'hich can be 'ai0ed or disre/arded. -t is a
duty that has to be %erformed and duly acted u%on by the court before the
administration is finally ordered closed and terminated, to the end that no %art of the
decedent's estate be left unaccounted for. he fact that the final accounts had been
a%%ro0ed does not di0est the court of 1urisdiction to re:uire su%%lemental accountin/
for, aside from the initial accountin/, the <ules %ro0ide that 6he shall render such
further accounts as the court may re:uire until the estate is 'holly settled.6
)& 3%6:"5 v. )& 3%6:"5 !"R$LL4
83 S!R" 2#6 (198)
&"$SJ his case is about the %ro%riety of allo'in/ as administrati0e e5%enses
certain disbursements made by the administrator of the testate estate of &eli5 de
Fuzman.
&eli5 de Fuzman 'as sur0i0ed by his ei/ht children. "mon/ the %ro%erties left by him
is a residential house located at Fa%an, .ue0e Bci1a. he ei/ht children co8o'ned this
%ro%erty %ro indi0iso. 9r. Kictorino de Fuzman, one of the heirs, 'as a%%ointed
administrator of the estate. 9r. de Fuzman submitted an accountin/ of his
administration of the estate. -n connection 'ith this, four of his siblin/s inter%osed an
o%%osition to some of the disbursements made by the administrator. Some of these
e5%enses include the re%airs and maintenance of the house, re%resentation e5%enses
and irri/ation e5%enses.
he lo'er court allo'ed as administrati0e e5%enses the said disbursements, sayin/
that an e5ecutor or administrator is allo'ed the necessary e5%enses in the care,
mana/ement, and settlement of the estate and that he is entitled to %ossess and
mana/e the decedent's real and %ersonal estate as lon/ as it is necessary for the
%ayment of the debts and the e5%enses of administration.
-SSCBJ ;(. =B L(;B< $(C< B<<B9 -. "LL(;-.F =B S"-9
BNPB.9-C<BS ( #B $="<FB9 "F"-.S =B BS"B>
=BL9J "s re/ards the re%airs and maintenance of the house, S$ held that this is a
%ro%er e5%ense of the estate as it redounded to the benefit of the heirs, 'ho are the
co8o'ners of the house %ro indi0iso. he said e5%enses 'ere meant to Aee% u% 'ith
the social standin/ of the family.
=o'e0er, the e5%enses incurred by Librada, an heir 'ho has been li0in/ in the house
does not :ualify as an administrati0e e5%ense. he S$ did not a/ree 'ith the lo'er
courtDs rationale that the fact of LibradaDs stay at the house does not de%ri0e the other
heirs of the o%%ortunity to stay there as 'ell. hose e5%enses 'ere %ersonal to
Librada and should be shouldered by her and not by the estate.
(n the issue of the re%resentation e5%enses, it 'as liAe'ise disallo'ed because there
'as no e5%lanation %ro0ided for the same. he e5%enses on the 1st death
anni0ersary 'ere also disallo'ed because that does not fall under the funeral
e5%enses.
he e5%enses re/ardin/ the attorneyDs subsistence and the %hysicianDs /ift 'ere
allo'ed.
he e5%enses on the irri/ation system 'as also allo'ed des%ite the fact that it 'as
not that clear because the heirs did not e5%ress any contention as re/ards the same.
he <ules of $ourt %ro0ides that one of the conditions of the administrator's bond is
that he should render a true and 1ust account of his administration to the court. he
court may e5amine him u%on oath 'ith res%ect to e0ery matter relatin/ to his
accountin/ 6and shall so e5amine him as to the correctness of his account before the
same is allo'ed. B5ce%t 'hen no ob1ection is made to the allo'ance of the account
and its correctness is satisfactorily established by com%etent %roof, the heirs,
le/atees, distributees, and creditors of the estate shall ha0e the same %ri0ile/e as the
e5ecutor or administrator of bein/ e5amined on oath on any matter relatin/ to an
administration account.6
&urthermore, a hearin/ is usually held before an administrator's account is a%%ro0ed,
es%ecially if an interested %arty raises ob1ections to certain items in the accountin/
re%ort
"t that hearin/, the %ractice is for the administrator to taAe the 'itness stand, testify
under oath on his accounts and identify the recei%ts, 0ouchers and documents
e0idencin/ his disbursements 'hich are offered as e5hibits. =e may be interro/ated
by the court and cross8e5amined by the o%%ositors's counsel. he o%%ositors may
%resent %roofs to rebut the administrator's e0idence in su%%ort of his accounts.
S%$L$453 G !4. v. !($4 1"CS"5 12 .($L 13
&"$SJ
"0elina $aballero o'ned a %ro%erty in 2anila, duly re/istered under her name. She
borro'ed P1,000 2e5ican currency from &rancisca )ose and as a security for the
loan, she turned o0er the title of the said %ro%erty to )ose. he transaction 'as not
inscribed in the title.
$aballero died and Sil0ina $hio8aysan instituted a %etition for the declaration of
heirshi%. he $&- 2anila found her to be the dau/hter of )ose $hio8aysan and
$aballero, /ranted the %etition and declared her as the only and e5clusi0e heir of
$aballero.
"n inscri%tion to the effect that Sil0ina $hio8aysan is the o'ner of the %ro%erty at
issue 'as made in the <9. $hio8aysan borro'ed money from &ire and 2arine
-nsurance and Loan $o. and mort/a/ed the said land as security for the loan. Suilion/
U $o. is the a%%ointed li:uidator of &ire and 2arine -nsurance and Loan $o.
he husband of $hio8aysan instituted s%ecial %roceedin/s for the administration of
the estate of $aballero, of 'hich he 'as a%%ointed as the administrator. =e submitted
an in0entory of the %ro%erties of the estate, 'hich included the sub1ect land. )ose
submitted her claim a/ainst the estate as a creditor of the deceased. Suilion/
instituted a case a/ainst the estate and sou/ht to foreclose on its mort/a/e. he court
%ermitted )ose to inter0ene. )ose asAed that the mort/a/e e5ecuted bet'een Suilion/
and $hio8aysan be rescinded and declared no effect. he lo'er court ruled in fa0or
of Suilion/ and a/ainst $hio8aysan and )ose.
-SSCBJ ;(. =B <-"L $(C< B<<B9 -. 9B.?-.F ".? <BL-B& ( )(SB>
=BL9J ?BS.
he $, in rulin/ a/ainst )ose, held that, she abandoned 'hate0er lien she has on the
%ro%erty 'hen she submitted a claim a/ainst the estate of $aballero. S$ held that all
)ose asAed in the %etition is merely for rescission and annulment of the mort/a/e
e5ecuted bet'een Suilion/ and $hio8aysan and of the inscri%tion in the title of the
%ro%erty, and a declaration that as a creditor of the estate she has a su%erior ri/ht to
that of the %laintiff com%any in the %roceeds of any sale of the land in :uestion. She
does not seeA to enforce her claim and reco0er her debt in this %roceedin/, but merely
to %re0ent the %laintiff from securin/ a 1ud/ment in this action 'hich 'ould taAe out of
the estate %ro%erty 'hich she belie0es to be sub1ect to her claim set u% in the
administration %roceedin/s.
"ccordin/ to the $i0il $ode, a sole and e5clusi0e heir became the o'ner of the
%ro%erty, and 'as char/ed 'ith the obli/ations of the deceased at the moment of his
death, u%on %recisely the same terms and conditions as the %ro%erty 'as held and as
the obli/ations bad been incurred by the deceased %rior to his death, sa0e only that
'hen he acce%ted the inheritance, 6'ith benefit of an in0entory6 he 'as not held liable
for the debts and obli/ations of the deceased beyond the 0alue of the %ro%erty 'hich
came into his hands.
=o'e0er, the .e' $i0il code, 'hich 'as a%%licable to the case at bar, %ro0ides a
machinery for the enforcement of the debts and other obli/ations of the deceased, not
as debts or obli/ations of the heir, but as debts or obli/ations of the deceased, to the
%ayment of 'hich the %ro%erty of the deceased may be sub1ected 'here0er it be
found.
-t is e0ident, therefore, that a 1ud/ment in an action for the declaration of heirshi% in
fa0or of one or more heirs could not entitle such %ersons to be reco/nized as the
o'ner or o'ners of the %ro%erty of the deceased on the same terms as such %ro%erty
'as held by the deceased, for it %asses to the heir, under the ne' code, burdened
'ith all the debts of the deceased his death ha0in/ created a lien thereon for the
benefit of creditor
S$ held that it is e0ident that $aballeroDs death created a lien u%on her %ro%erty in
fa0or of )ose, for the %ayment of the debt contracted by her durin/ her lifetime, and
that this ou/ht to ha0e and has %riority to any lien created u%on this %ro%erty by the
heir of the deceasedI that the 1udicial declaration of heirshi% in fa0or of Sil0ina $hio8
aysan, could not and did not furnish a basis for an entry in the land re/istry of the
name of Sil0ina $hio8aysan as the absolute o'ner of the %ro%erty of "0elina
$aballeroI that such entry, im%ro%erly made, could not and did not %re1udice, the lien
of )ose, for the debt due her by the deceased and that the mort/a/e of the %ro%erty of
the deceased by her heir, Sil0ina $hio8aysan, 'as sub1ect to the %rior lien of )ose,
for the %ayment of her debt.
S"514S v. :"5"R"53
&actsJ 9e (cam%o died on .o0ember 13,1+0*. -t 'as stated in his 'ill that debts
detailed therein be %aid by his 'ife and e5ecutors in the form and at the time a/reed
u%on 'ith the creditors. "mon/ the debts are t'o in fa0or of Santos. he 'ill 'as
duly %robated and a committee a%%ointed to hear and determine the claims a/ainst
the estate as mi/ht be %resented.
he committee submitted its re%ort to the court on )une 2,,1+03. Santos %resented a
%etition to the court on )uly 1@,1+0+ asAin/ that the committee be re:uired to
recon0ene and %ass u%on his claims a/ainst the estate 'hich 'ere reco/nized in the
'ill of the testator. his 'as denied. Santos then instituted the %resent %roceedin/s
a/ainst the administrati5 of the estate to reco0er the sums. <elief 'as denied.
=ence, this a%%eal.
-n his %etition of )uly 1@,1+0+, Santos states that his failure to %resent his claims to
the committee 'as due to his belief that it 'as unnecessary to do so because of the
fact that the testator, in his 'ill, e5%ressly reco/nized them and directed that they
should be %aid.
-ssueJ 9id the court err in refusin/ to recon0ene the committee for the %ur%ose of
considerin/ claims of Santos>
=eldJ
Sec*3+ of $ode of $i0il Procedure %ro0idesJ Ghe court shall allo' such time as the
circumstances of the case re:uire for the creditors to %resent their claims to the
committee for e5amination and allo'anceI but not, in the first instance, more than
t'el0e months, or less than si5 monthsI and the time allo'ed shall be stated in the
commission. he court may e5tend the time as circumstances re:uire, but not so that
the 'hole time shall e5ceed ei/hteen months.E -ts sa0in/ clause is found on Sec*+0,
'hich statesJ G(n a%%lication of a creditor 'ho has failed to %resent his claim, if made
'ithin si5 months from the time %re0iously limited, or, if a committee fails to /i0e the
notice re:uired by this cha%ter, and such a%%lication is made before the final
settlement of the estate, the court may, for cause sho'n, and on such terms as are
e:uitable, rene' the commission and allo' further time, not e5ceedin/ one month, for
the committee to e5amine such claim, in 'hich case it shall %ersonally notify the
%arties of the time and %lace of hearin/, and as soon as may be maAe the return of
their doin/s to the court.E
-n the %resent case the time %re0iously limited 'as si5 months from )uly 27,1+0,, or
until )anuary 27,1+03. he court, in its discretion, could e5tend 'ithin si5 months after
)anuary 27,1+03, or until )uly 27,1+03. =o'e0er, SantosD %etition 'as not %resented
until )uly 1@,1+0+.
$5 R& &S1"1& 49 )& )$4S
&actsJ
(smena claims to ha0e had a claim a/ainst the estate of de 9ios, but did not %resent
the same 'ithin si5 months for the %resentation of claims to the commissioners.
(smena mo0ed for an e5tension, alle/in/ that durin/ said time one of the heirs of said
estate 'as maAin/ %ro%ositions to him ((smena) to %ay on his (the heirDs) account the
debt, and in the ho%e that the %ro%osed settlement 'ould terminate satisfactorily he
did not ha0e the o%%ortunity to formulate his claim 'ithin the si5 months, and that said
heir did not ho'e0er %aid the debt.
he $ourt denied the motion, as the $ourt did not find in said motion any alle/ation
'hich they may consider 1ust cause.
-ssueJ
;4. the $ourt erred in refusin/ to e5tend the %eriod for the %resentation of the claims
a/ainst the estate of de 9ios.
=eldJ
#efore the time in 'hich claimants must %resent their claims a/ainst an estate is
e5tended, the %erson asAin/ the %ri0ile/e must %resent sound reasons therefor.
;hether or not those are sufficient and 'hether as a result of their %resentation the
time ou/ht or ou/ht not to be e5tended rests in the sound discretion of the court.
=o'e0er, the a%%ellant failed to sho' that the court belo' abused the discretion. =e,
admittin/ full Ano'led/e of the time 'ithin 'hich he should ha0e %resented his claim,
%resents no sufficient e5%lanation for failure to %resent 'ithin the %eriod. "lthou/h
durin/ said time ne/otiations may ha0e been %endin/, the claim could ha0e been
%resented ne0ertheless.
S$E"1 v. 7$%)" *e 7$LL"5%&7"
&actsJ
SiAat, 1udicial administrator of intestate estate of 2ariano Killanue0a, filed a com%laint
a/ainst Kda de Killanue0a, 1udicial administrati5 of intestate estate of Pedro
Killanue0a, 'ith re/ard to the credit of 2ariano.
Kda de Killanue0a set u% %rescri%tion as defense.
$ held that action has %rescribed.
-ssueJ
; the $ erred in holdin/ that the claim of 2arianoDs estate a/ainst PedroDs estate
has already %rescribed.
=eldJ
Cnder Sec*3+ of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, the ma5imum %eriod for the
%resentation of claims a/ainst the estate is ei/hteen months from the time fi5ed by the
committee on claims and a%%raisal in its notice, and this %eriod may be e5tended one
month if a creditor a%%lies for it 'ithin si5 months after the first term, accordin/ to
Sec*+0.
-t may be ar/ued that inasmuch as none of the %ersons entitled to be a%%ointed
administrators or to a%%ly for the a%%ointment of an administrator ha0e taAen any ste%
in that direction, and since no administrator or committee on claims and a%%raisal has
been a%%ointed to fi5 the time for filin/ claims, the ri/ht of SiAat to %resent the claim
could not %rescribe.
=o'e0er, SiAat 'as /uilty of laches in not institutin/ the intestate %roceedin/s of
Pedro until after the la%se of three years after this court has set aside the intestate
%roceedin/s be/un.
o hold other'ise 'ould %ermit a creditor ha0in/ Ano'led/e of his debtorDs death to
Aee% the latterDs estate in sus%ense indefinitely, by not institutin/ either testate or
intestate %roceedin/s in order to %resent his claim, to the %re1udice of the heirs and
le/atees.
1$>": v. S$8453("54C
his case did not mention anythin/ on %eriod 'ithin 'hich to file claims a/ainst the
estate. -t only discussed laches.
&actsJ
#arely a month after the effecti0ity of the )udiciary "ct of 1+@3, s%ouses i1am filed a
case a/ainst s%ouses Sibon/hanoy to reco0er P1,+03. he $ourt ruled in fa0or of
s%ouses i1am.
he $ourt issued a 'rit of e5ecution a/ainst s%ouses Sibon/hanoy. he 'rit ha0in/
been returned unsatisfied, s%ouses i1am mo0ed for the issuance of a 'rit of
e5ecution a/ainst the SuretyDs bond. he Surety o%%osed on the /round of absence
of a %re0ious demand. he $ourt denied the motion. .ecessary demand 'as made
and second motion for e5ecution 'as filed. he $ourt /ranted this and a 'rit 'as
issued.
he Surety mo0ed to :uash on the /round that there 'as no summary hearin/. he
$ denied. -n the $", the Surety filed a 2otion to 9ismiss, alle/in/ lacA of 1urisdiction
as the action 'as filed in the $&- 'hereas the )udiciary "ct of 1+@3 'as at the time
already in o%eration 'hich conferred e5clusi0e 1urisdiction to inferior courts all ci0il
actions 'here the 0alue does not e5ceed P2,000.
=eldJ
)urisdiction o0er the sub1ect matter is conferred u%on the courts e5clusi0ely be la'.
=o'e0er, Surety is barred by laches from in0oAin/ lacA of 1urisdiction at this late hour
for the %ur%ose of annullin/ e0erythin/ done in this case 'ith its acti0e %artici%ation.
he action 'as commenced in the $&- on )uly 1+,1+@3, that is almost fifteen years
before the Surety filed its motion to dismiss on )anuary 12,1+*7 raisin/ the :uestion
of lacA of 1urisdiction for the first time.
R4)R$3%&6 v. !"
his case did not mention anythin/ on %eriod 'ithin 'hich to file claims a/ainst the
estate. -t only discussed laches.
&actsJ
.ie0es $ruz authorized the s%ouses Kalenzuela, Kictorio and Santos to sell a %arcel
of land belon/in/ to her. Subse:uently, the a/ency contract 'as 0erbally no0ated into
a sales a/reement. "s confirmed in a recei%t, ad0ance %ayment 'as made.
2ean'hile %roceedin/s to %lace the land under the orrens system 'ere initiated. -n
due season ($ 'as issued to the a%%licants .ie0es $ruz and her brother Bmilio.
B0entually, %ursuant to a %artition bet'een .ie0es and Bmilio, ($ 'as cancelled
and su%erseded by t'o $s.
hen .ie0es $ruz sold the %ro%erty in :uestion to <odri/uez. " $ 'as issued in
the name of <odri:uez 'hich carried o0er the annotation res%ectin/ the ri/hts of
Kalenzuela, Kictorio and Santos. .ie0es /a0e notice to the three of her decision to
rescind their ori/inal a/reement enclosin/ the sums ad0anced by them. -n their re%ly,
they contended that the a/reement sou/ht to be rescinded had been no0ated by a
sales a/reement. hey also im%leaded <odri/uez.
Pendin/ the %roceedin/s, .ie0es died and 'as substituted by her sur0i0in/ children.
he $ found for .ie0es and her buyer <odri/uez. he $" re0ersed, maAin/
reference to the annotation and statin/ that <odri/uezD ac:uisition of the land must
yield to the su%erior ri/hts of the a%%ellants. =ence, this %etition. hey alle/ed that
the land in0ol0ed has a 0alue in e5cess of P200,000 and so the $" should ha0e
certified the a%%eal to the S$, %ursuant to the )udiciary "ct of 1+@3.
=eldJ
-t has been %ro0ed that the 0alue of the land 'as belo' P200,000 'hen the a%%eal
'as %erfected. "nd assumin/ that the 0alue is in e5cess of P200,000, they are
already esto%%ed to set aside the decision. he fact remains that they had allo'ed an
unreasonable %eriod of time to la%se before they raised the :uestion of 0alue and
1urisdiction, and only after the res%ondent $ourt had decided a/ainst her.
)anan v. 8uen0a;+no
&actsJ 9ominador 9anan died intestate.
(n .o0ember 17, 1+,7, the court issued an order directin/ all %ersons ha0in/ money
claims a/ainst the estate to file them 'ithin si5 months after the date of the first
%ublication of the order 'hich 'as 9ecember 10, 1+,7. (n )une 12, 1+,@, #enito
2analansan and -nes Kitu/ 2analansan filed a contin/ent claim.
(n )uly 11, 1+,@, the administratri5 filed an ans'er to the contin/ent claim
he court allo'ed the claim to be heard 'ithout %re1udice to the ri/ht of the
administratri5 to %resent rebuttal e0idence. "tty. .a0arro, 'ho re%resented the
2analansans, asAed that the %resentation of the e5hibits be made durin/ the ne5t
hearin/ 'herein the administratri5 shall be /i0en the o%%ortunity to %resent rebuttal
e0idence. "ccordin/ly, the court set the ne5t hearin/ to (ctober 7, 1+,@, but 'as reset
to .o0ember 13, 1+,@, at the re:uest of the administratri5.
-t 'as only on )anuary 3, 1+31, that the administratri5 filed an (%%osition to
$ontin/ent $laim a/ainst Bstate. here the administratri5 :uestioned the 1urisdiction
of the court to entertain the claim
-ssueJ
;(. the court can taAe co/nizance of a claim filed a/ainst the Bstate 'hen said
claim 'as filed outside the %eriod
=eldJ
he contin/ent claim 'as filed t'o days beyond the si58month %eriod sti%ulated in the
order 'hich directed all %ersons ha0in/ money claims a/ainst the estate to file them.
=o'e0er, it is to be noted that the claim 'as filed on )une 12, 1+,@, 'hereas the
timeliness of its filin/ 'as raised only on )anuary 3, 1+31, in the (%%osition to the
$ontin/ent $laim a/ainst Bstate. -n the interre/num the administratri5 had ac:uiesced
to the entertainment of the claim by filin/ an ans'er thereto on )uly 11, 1+,@, and
a/ain by asAin/ for %ost%onement of the (ctober 7, 1+,@, hearin/ 'herein she 'as to
%resent her rebuttal e0idence. She is not only esto%%ed by her conduct but laches
also bar her claim.
2oreo0er, <ule 3*, Sec. 2 of the <ules of $ourt /i0es the %robate court discretion to
allo' claims %resented beyond the %eriod %re0iously fi5ed %ro0ided that they are filed
'ithin one month from the e5%iration of such %eriod but in no case beyond the date of
entry of the order of distribution. he contin/ent claim of the 2analansans 'as filed
'ithin both %eriods.
Qu+su;b+n, v. 3u+son
&actsJ
9urin/ her lifetime, the deceased, $onsuelo Syya%, e5ecuted a %romissory note in
fa0or of Leonardo Fuison.
-n the in0entory filed by the administrator of the estate of the deceased, the obli/ation
'as acAno'led/ed as one of the liabilities of the decedent.
Syya% died on .o0ember 70, 1+@0. (n 9ecember 5, 1+@0, intestate %roceedin/s
'ere instituted and notice /i0en to creditors to file their claim 'ithin si5 months, 'hich
%eriod for filin/ claims e5%ired on "u/ust 71, 1+@1.
Fuison died on 9ecember 71, 1+@1, and his son, 'ho 'as a%%ointed as administrator
of the intestate estate of his deceased father, filed a claim a/ainst Syya%Ds estate on
2arch +, 1+@7.
-n his re%ly to the ans'er of the administrator of the estate of Syya%, the claimant
stated that he belie0ed in /ood faith that he 'as relie0ed of the obli/ation to file a
claim 'ith the court, because the debt 'as admitted in the in0entory and Syya%Ds
administrator had been %ayin/ the interest due on the note u% to )anuary 1+@7.
he lo'er court ordered the a%%ellant, administrator for Syya%Ds estate, to %ay the
debt.
-ssueJ
;(. cause 'as sho'n by the claimant 'hy he did not file the claim 'ithin the time
%re0iously limited
=eldJ
;hen the court allo's a claim to be filed for cause or causes 'hich it considers as
sufficient, on a%%eal, this court cannot re0erse the action of the lo'er court unless the
latter has abused its discretion 'hich has not been sho'n by the a%%ellant in this
case.
he a%%ellant does not only acAno'led/e in the in0entory the e5istence of the debt,
but does not deny it in his ans'er and had been %ayin/ interest due thereon u% to
)anuary 1+@7, t'o months before the claim had been filed.
he court considered the admission of the e5istence of the debt in the in0entory filed
by the a%%ellant as one of the reasonable causes or reasons for his failure to file it
'ithin the time %re0iously limited.
&0/aus v. 8-an0o
&actsJ
Petitioner "n/elina Bchaus, in her o'n behalf and as "dministratri5 of the intestate
estate of her deceased father, filed a com%laint on 2ay 70, 1+*2 a/ainst $harles
.e'ton =od/es ($... =od/es) %rayin/ for an accountin/ of the business co0erin/ the
#a8a Subdi0ision, the reco0ery of her share in the %rofits and remainin/ assets of
their business and the %ayment of e5%enses and dama/es.
he trial court rendered 1ud/ment in fa0or of %etitioner.
he same trial court issued an order /rantin/ %etitionerDs motion for the issuance of a
'rit of e5ecution a/ainst the Phili%%ine $ommercial and -ndustrial #anA (P$-#), as
administrator of the estate of deceased $. .. =od/es. =o'e0er, the 'rit 'as not
enforced as %etitioner o%ted to file a motion dated &ebruary 20, 1+*, in S%ecial
Proceedin/s .o. 1*,2 (estate %roceedin/s of deceased $. .. =od/es) for the
%ayment of the 1ud/ment.
<es%ondent )ud/e <amon #lanco issued an (rder reiteratin/ his %osition that the
motion to direct %ayment of the 1ud/ment credit cannot yet be resol0ed.
Petitioner then filed the instant %etition for mandamus seeAin/ to set aside res%ondent
1ud/e's order and to order P$-# to %ay the 1ud/ment credit in $i0il $ase .o. **23.
Pri0ate res%ondent "0elina 2a/no, in her memorandum in lieu of oral ar/ument,
alle/ed that the )ud/ment sou/ht to be enforced is barred under the <ules of $ourt.
he %roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate of $. .. =od/es 'as o%ened in 1+*2
and the notice to creditors 'as %ublished in 6?uhum6 a ne's%a%er of /eneral
circulation in its issues of 2arch 12, 10, and 2,, 1+*7. Cnder Section 2, <ule 2, of the
<ules of $ourt, the time %ro0ided for filin/ claims a/ainst the estate shall be stated by
the court in the notice, 'hich shall not be more than t'el0e (12) months nor less than
si5 (*) months after the date of its first %ublication.
-ssueJ
;(. %etitionerDs motion to direct %ayment only on &ebruary 20, 1+*,, more than four
years from the %ublication of the notice, is already barred
=eldJ
he <ules of $ourt allo's a creditor to file his claim after the %eriod set by the court in
the notice to creditors, %ro0ided the conditions stated in the rules are %resent.
-t is clear from Section 2 of <ule 3, Vno' <ule 3*W that the %eriod %rescribed in the
notice to creditors is not e5clusi0eI that money claims a/ainst the estate may be
allo'ed any time before an order of distribution is entered, at the discretion of the
court for cause and u%on such terms as are e:uitable. "t the time %etitioner's motion
to direct %ayment of the 1ud/ment credit 'as filed, no order of distribution 'as issued
yet.
he claim 'as filed in the %robate court on &ebruary 25,1+5+ 'hile the defendants in
the ci0il case 'ere still %erfectin/ their a%%eal therein. he record does not sho' that
the administrator ob1ected thereto u%on the /round that it 'as filed out of time. he
%endency of that case is a /ood e5cuse for tardiness in the filin/ of the claim.
$,na0+o v. .a;bus0o
&actsJ
"u/ust 2+, 1+51. Pam%an/a #us $om%any, -nc. (Pambusco) lod/ed its com%laint
a/ainst t'o defendants Kalentin &ernando and Bncarnacion Blchico Kda. de
&ernando ($i0il $ase 1@5,3). he suit 'as to u%on a contractual obli/ation.
)anuary 27, 1+55. Bncarnacion Blchico Kda. de &ernando died. #y this time,
Pambusco in the fore/oin/ ci0il case had already %resented its e0idence and
submitted its case.
2arch 27, 1+55. -ntestate %roceedin/s 'ere filed. .otice to the estate's creditors 'as
/i0en for them to file their claims 'ithin si5 months from this date, the first %ublication
of the notice.
he $&- rendered 1ud/ment in the ci0il case ($i0il $ase 1@5,3) in fa0or of Pambusco.
)anuary 25, 1+*1. he 1ud/ment in the ci0il case ha0in/ reached finality, Pambusco
mo0ed in the intestate %roceedin/s that the heirs and4or the %resent 1oint
administratrices, be ordered to %ay the share of the deceased in the 1ud/ment debt.
he administratrices o%%osed.
-ssueJ
;(. PamubuscoDs claim is time8barred
=eldJ
-t matters not that Pambusco's said claim 'as filed 'ith the %robate court 'ithout the
si58month %eriod from 2arch 25, 1+55, set forth in the notice to creditors. &or, Section
2, <ule 3*, %ermits acce%tance of such belated claims.
he claim 'as filed in the %robate court on &ebruary 25, 1+5+, 'hile the defendants in
the ci0il case 'ere still %erfectin/ their a%%eal therein. he record does not sho' that
the administrator ob1ected thereto u%on the /round that it 'as filed out of time. he
%endency of that case is a /ood e5cuse for tardiness in the filin/ of the claim. "nd, the
order of final distribution is still to be /i0en.
he order of the lo'er court of allo'in/ %ayment of a%%ellee's claim 6im%liedly /ranted
said a%%ellee an e5tension of time 'ithin 'hich to file said claim.6 he %robate court's
discretion has not been abused. -t should not be disturbed.
)e Ra;a v. .a-+-eo
&actsJ
-n connection 'ith the %roceedin/ for the settlement of the intestate estate of the
deceased #eatriz $osio de <ama, and %ursuant to the order of the $&- before 'hich
the %roceedin/ is %endin/, a notice to all %ersons 'ith money claims a/ainst the
deceased to file their said claims 'ithin si5 months, 'as duly %ublished, the first notice
a%%earin/ in the "u/ust 17, 1+53.
he %eriod %ro0ided in the %ublished notice ha0in/ e5%ired 'ithout anybody filin/ any
claim a/ainst the deceased, the administrator, u%on order of the court, submitted a
final account of the estate and a %ro1ect of %artition, 'hich 'ere a%%ro0ed.
$herie Palileo %etitioned the court for %ermission to file a claim in the %roceedin/,
alle/in/ that on the decision of the $ourt of "%%eals %romul/ated on 2ay *, 1+*1, she
obtained a money 1ud/ment a/ainst the deceased.
"lthou/h the lo'er court decided in her fa0or the :uestion of o'nershi% and
%ossession of a real %ro%erty in0ol0ed in the case, it 'as only the $ourt of "%%eals
that /ranted money 1ud/ment, 'hen the case 'as decided on a%%eal.
he administrator o%%osed this %etition on the /round that the claim 'as filed beyond
the %eriod %ro0ided in the notice to creditors.
-ssueJ
;(. the claimant8a%%elleeDs money claim 'as filed beyond the %rescribed %eriod
=eldJ
he %eriod %rescribed in the notice to creditors is not e5clusi0eI that money claims
a/ainst the estate may be allo'ed any time before an order of distribution is entered,
at the discretion of the court, for cause and u%on such terms as are e:uitable. his
e5tension of the %eriod shall not e5ceed one month, from the issuance of the order
authorizin/ such e5tension.
he %etition of claimant8a%%ellee, for %ermission to file a claim in the %roceedin/, 'as
based on the fact that the a'ard of dama/es in her fa0or, a/ainst the deceased, 'as
contained in the decision of the $ourt of "%%eals 'hich 'as %romul/ated after the *8
month %eriod %ro0ided in the notice to creditors had already ela%sed. -t is her
contention that she could not ha0e filed a money claim a/ainst the estate before the
%romul/ation of said decision because althou/h the lo'er court in that case u%held
her ri/ht to the o'nershi% and %ossession of the buildin/ sub1ect thereof, no dama/es
'ere ad1ud/ed in her fa0or. $onsiderin/ this ar/ument, the lo'er court found it
sufficient to 1ustify the rela5ation of the rule and e5tension of the %eriod 'ithin 'hich to
file her claim. -n the circumstances, the action taAen by the lo'er court cannot be
considered an abuse of discretion amountin/ to lacA or e5cess of 1urisdiction to 1ustify
its re0ersal by this court.
.$5&)" 7S. !9$
&actsJ
he deceased Killadie/o, had submitted and %aid his income ta5es for the years 1+25
and 1+2* before his death. 9urin/ the intestate %roceedin/s for his estate, the $-<
made a re0ision of the assessment and found that it 'as underassessed by P2@0.
he res%ondent 1ud/e in the intestate %roceedin/s then issued an order u%on motion
orderin/ the administrati5es to %ay the additional ta5 assessed.
Petitioners claim that the court had no 1urisdiction to order the %ayment of the claim
'ithout the %resentation of the same to the committee on claims
-ssueJ ;4. the court has 1urisdiction
=eldJ ?es it does. he clear 'ei/ht of 1udicial authority is to the effect that claims for
ta5es and assessments, 'hether assessed before or after the death of the decedent,
are .( re:uired to be %resented to the committee
-n the case before us the ta5 no' claimed by the Fo0ernment 'as not due until it 'as
assessedI and this assessment 'as not made until after the indi0idual a/ainst 'hom
the ta5 'as assessed had died. he claim therefore arose durin/ the course of
administration. he la' im%oses on the administrator of a deceased %erson the duty
to %ay ta5es assessed a/ainst the %ro%erty of the deceasedI and as is 'ell Ano'n, in
case of insol0ency, such ta5es constitute a %referential claim in the distribution of
assets o0er ordinary debts, under section ,75 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure. -n the
case, before us it is not su//ested that the estate is insol0ent, and there is therefore
no dan/er of im%erilin/ the %ayment of funeral e5%enses or e5%enses of last sicAness
by orderin/ the immediate %ayment of these ta5es.
347&R5:&51 7S. .":$51%"5
&actsJ
Pamintuan filed and %aid his ta5es for the year 1+1+. =e then died and intestate
%roceedin/s 'ere initiated and his %ro%erty 'as distributed to his heirs. "fter the
%roceedin/s 'ere closed, it 'as disco0ered that the deceased did not in fact %ay the
additional income ta5 due for the year 1+1+ resultin/ from the net %rofits from the sale
of his house 'hich 'as not included in his return for the year. 9efendants cannot
dis%ro0e the claim of the /o0ernment since they ha0e destroyed the records and
e0idence re/ardin/ the sale. hey claim that the failure of the %laintiff to file its claim
'ith the committee on claims barred it from collectin/ the ta5 in :uestion in this action.
-ssueJ ;4. the failure to file the claim 'ith the committee barred it from collectin/ the
ta5.
=eldJ .o it is not.
he administration %roceedin/s of the late &lorentino Pamintuan ha0in/ been closed,
and his estate distributed amon/ his heirs, the defendants herein, the latter are
res%onsible for the %ayment of the income ta5 here in :uestion in %ro%ortion to the
share of each in said estate, in accordance 'ith section ,71 of the $ode of $i0il
Procedure, and the doctrine of this court laid do'n in Lo%ez 0s. Bnri:uez (1*
Phil.,77*) as follo'sJ
BS"BI L-"#-L-? (& =B-<S ".9 9-S<-#CBBS. X =eirs are not re:uired to
res%ond 'ith their o'n %ro%erty for the debts of their deceased ancestors. #ut e0en
after the %artition of an estate, heirs and distributees are liable indi0idually for the
%ayment of all la'ful outstandin/ claims a/ainst the estate in %ro%ortion to the amount
or 0alue of the %ro%erty they ha0e res%ecti0ely recei0ed from the estate. he
hereditary %ro%erty consists only of that %art 'hich remains after the settlement of all
la'ful claims a/ainst the estate, for the settlement of 'hich the entire estate is first
liable. he heirs cannot, by any act of their o'n or by a/reement amon/ themsel0es,
reduce the creditors' security for the %ayment of their claims.
&or the reasons stated, 'e are of o%inion and so hold that claims for income ta5es
need not be filed 'ith the committee on claims and a%%raisals a%%ointed in the course
of testate %roceedin/s and may be collected e0en after the distribution of the
decedent's estate amon/ his heirs, 'ho shall be liable therefore in %ro%ortion to their
share in the inheritance.
&7"53&L$S1" 7S. L" .R47&&)4R"
&actsJ
2anuel "bad Santos died and subse:uently, a 'rit of e5ecution 'as issued and his
%ro%erty 'as le0ied by the sheriff. 2ean'hile, intestate %roceedin/ for the settlement
of his estate 'as filed and %etitioner 'as a%%ointed administratri5. B0en %rior to her
a%%ointment, ha0in/ been notified of the scheduled auction sale of the %ro%erty
sub1ect of the le0y, she informed the sheriff of the death of "bad Santos and
demanded that he desist from the sale. She filed a motion 'ith the court but it 'as
denied and the %ro%erty 'as sold to the hi/hest bidder, La Pro0eedora.
-ssueJ ;4. the 1ud/ment must be %resented as a claim a/ainst the estate if the
debtor dies before the le0y of e5ecution.
=eldJ ?es it must be %resented.
he %ro%erty le0ied u%on in case the 1ud/ment debtor dies after the entry of 1ud/ment,
as in this case, may be sold for the satisfaction of the 1ud/ment in case death occurs
Gafter e5ecution is actually le0ied.E (n the other hand, Section 5 of <ule 3* %ro0ides
that a 1ud/ment for money a/ainst the decedent must be filed 'ith the court in the
%roceedin/ for the settlement of the estate. -n other 'ords, the cut8off date is the date
of actual le0y of e5ecution. -f the 1ud/ment debtor dies after such le0y, the %ro%erty
le0ied u%on may be soldI if before, the money 1ud/ment must be %resented as a claim
a/ainst the estate, althou/h of course the same need no lon/er be %ro0ed, the
1ud/ment itself bein/ conclusi0e. #ut the 1ud/ment creditor 'ill share the estate 'ith
other creditors, sub1ect only to such %references as are %ro0ided by la'.
Since in this case the death of the deceased %receded the le0y of e5ecution on his
%ro%erties, the 1ud/ment a/ainst his should be %resented as a claim a/ainst his
estate, and the sale at auction carried out by the sheriff is null and 0oid.
R&3"L" 7S. !"
&actsJ
P< filed a case a/ainst <e/ala for reco0ery of money. he 1ud/e /ranted the motion
for the issuance of a 'rit of %reliminary attachment a/ainst the %ro%erties of <e/ala.
9urin/ trial, <e/ala died and his heirs %rayed for the dismissal of the com%laint based
on <ule 7, Section 21.
-ssueJ ;4. the case should be dismissed u%on the death of the defendant.
=eldJ
here is no :uestion that the action in the $ourt belo' is for collection or reco0ery of
money.
-t is already a settled rule that an action for reco0ery of money for collection of a debt
is one that does not sur0i0e and u%on the death of the defendant the case should be
dismissed to be %resented in the manner es%ecially %ro0ided in the <ules of $ourt.
his is e5%licitly %ro0ided in Sec. 21, <ule 7 of the <ules of $ourt 'hich states thatJ
Sec. 21. ,here claim does not survive. X hen the action is for reco0ery of money,
debt or interest thereon, and the defendant dies before final 1ud/ment in the $ourt of
&irst -nstance, it shall be dismissed to be %rosecuted in the manner es%ecially
%ro0ided in these rules.
he reason for the dismissal of the case is that u%on the death of the defendant a
testate or intestate %roceedin/ shall be instituted in the %ro%er court 'herein all his
creditors must a%%ear and file their claims 'hich shall be %aid %ro%ortionately out of
the %ro%erty left by the deceased.
;e hold that as the com%laint filed a/ainst "/ustin P. <e/ala 'as for a sum of money,
the trial court lost 1urisdiction there o0er u%on his death on , )une 1+3+, before final
1ud/ment thereon could be rendered. $onse:uently, such claim must no' be
dismissed, 'ithout %re1udice to its bein/ filed a/ainst the estate of the deceased
defendant in the a%%ro%riate %robate %roceedin/s.
)$645 7S. !"
&actsJ #alde 'as an em%loyee of the &ernandez $om%anies and he 'as summarily
dismissed from his 1ob. =e then filed a case for reco0ery of dama/es resultin/ from
ille/al dismissal a/ainst &ernandez, the President of the com%anies. &ernandez
ho'e0er died before final 1ud/ment. he le/al conse:uences of the %artyDs death are
'hat are not chiefly in issue.
-ssueJ ;4. the case should be dismissed because of the death of the defendant.
=eldJ ?es, it should be dismissed.
-f the defendant dies after final 1ud/ment of the <$, the action (for money, debt or
interest thereon) is dismissed, and an a%%eal may be taAen by or a/ainst the
administrator, bit if that 1ud/ment a/ainst the deceased becomes final and e5ecutory,
it shall be enforced, not by e5ecution under <ule 7+, but in accordance 'ith Section 5
of <ule 3*, i.e. by %resentin/ the same as a claim a/ainst the estate.
-f, on the other hand, the claim a/ainst the defendant is other than for money, debt or
interest thereon P i.e. it is a real action, or one for reco0ery of %ersonal %ro%erty Gor to
enforce a lien thereon, and actions to reco0er dama/es for an in1ury to %erson or
%ro%erty, real or %ersonal,E su%ra Pand the defendant dies, the claim a/ainst him is not
dismissed but continue a/ainst the decedentsD le/al re%resentati0e.
-t 'as therefore error for the trial court to decline to dismiss the suit as a/ainst the
deceased and to insist on continuin/ 'ith the action as to &ernendez by orderin/ his
substitution by his administrator.
<ule 3*, Sections 7 P 5
8on+--a v. 8ar0ena
&actsJ
&ortuna #arcena, mother of minors <osalio and Sal0acion #onilla, and 'ife of
Ponciano #onilla, instituted a ci0il action in $&- "bra to :uiet title o0er certain %arcels
of land in "bra.
9efendants filed a motion to dismiss com%laint on the /round that &ortuna is dead
and therefore has no le/al ca%acity to sue.
$ourt immediately dismissed a case, rulin/ that a real %arty in interest has no le/al
%ersonality to sue.
-ssueJ
;hether or not &ortuna can be substituted by her heirs
=eldJ
Substitution of minor children should be allo'ed. ;hile it is true that a
%erson 'ho is dead cannot sue in court, yet he can be substituted by his heirs in
%ursuin/ the case u% to its com%letion if the court timely ac:uired 1urisdiction o0er her
%erson. he records of the case sho' that the death of &ortuna tooA %lace after the
com%laint 'as filed, therefore, the court had ac:uired 1urisdiction o0er her %erson.
Cnder section 1,, <ule 7, <($, it is the duty of the court, if the le/al
re%resentati0e fails to a%%ear, to order the o%%osin/ %arty to %rocure the a%%ointment
of a le/al re%resentati0e of the deceased. -n the case at bar, this %rocedure need not
ha0e been com%lied 'ith since &ortunaDs counsel had not only asAed that the minor
children be substituted for her but also su//ested that their uncle be a%%ointed as
le/al /uardian ad litem for them since their father is busy in 2anila earnin/ a li0in/.
H .eneyra v. $"!
&actsJ
#oard of rustees of $orre/idor $olle/e -nc. ($$-) a'arded the
mana/ement and o%eration of its canteen at a monthly rental of P30 to %ets.
Subse:uently, u%on instructions of 9izon, $hairman of $$-, the rental %ayments of
%ets 'ere refused and %artial demolition of the canteen 'as effected. Pets filed an
action a/ainst 9izon for dama/es 'ith %reliminary mandatory in1unction.
"fter sometime, 9izon died and his counsel mo0ed to dismiss the com%laint
by reason thereof. $ dismissed the com%laint on the /round that the action for
dama/es did not sur0i0e the death of 9izon.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the action for dama/es a/ainst 9izon sur0i0ed his death
=eldJ
"n action for reco0ery of dama/es for in1ury to %ersonal %ro%erty is not
e5tin/uished by the death of the defendant. his is because such action may still be
brou/ht a/ainst the e5ecutor or administrator of the defendantDs estate. 9izon should
then be substituted by the e5ecutor4administrator4le/al re%resentati0e of his estate as
%arty8defendant.
H 8 )e 8aut+sta v. )e 3uz;an
&actsJ
.umenario #autista, husband and father of %laintiffs8a%%ellees, sustained
%hysical in1uries 'hile inside a %assen/er 1ee% dri0en by 2edrano (con0icted of
homicide throu/h recAless im%rudence)I and o'ned and o%erated by <osendo de
Fuzman
;rit of e5ecution 'as issued a/ainst the dri0er but remained unsatisfied.
"fter 'hich, 9e Fuzman died. Plaintiff8a%%ellees then %rayed that heirs of 9e Fuzman
%ay the sums as 'ell as the costs of suit.
he heirs of de Fuzman refused. -n su%%ort of this motion, they maintained
that the suit 'as for a money claim a/ainst the su%%osed debtor 'ho 'as already
dead and as such it should be filed in testate or intestate %roceedin/s, or in the
absence of such %roceedin/s, after the la%se of 70 days, the creditors should initiate
such %roceedin/s, that the heirs could not be held liable therefore since there 'as no
alle/ation that they assumed the alle/ed obli/ation.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the heirs of #autista can claim from the heirs of 9e Fuzman
=eldJ
#autista heirs can no lon/er reco0er because of ne/li/ence and a failure to
obser0e mandatory %ro0isions of the la' and the <ules. hey o0erlooAed the fact that
they 'ere no lon/er suin/ de Fuzman 'ho died shortly after the accident but his
heirs. Section 5, <ule 3* maAes it mandatory to inform the e5ecutor or administrator
of the claims a/ainst it, thus enablin/ him to e5amine each claim and determine
'hether it is a %ro%er one 'hich should be allo'ed.
he termination of intestate %roceedin/s and the distribution of the estate to
the heirs did not alter the fact that %laintiff8a%%ellees claim 'as a money claim 'hich
should ha0e been %resented before a %robate court. he only instance 'herein a
creditor can file an action a/ainst a distribute of the debtorDs asset is under Section 5,
<ule 33. B0en under this rule, the contin/ent claims must first ha0e been established
and allo'ed in the %robate court before the creditors can file an action directly a/ainst
the distributees.
H 9 ",uas v. L-e;os
&actsJ
Salinas and S%ouses "/uas 1ointly filed an action to reco0er dama/es from
Llamos, a0errin/ that the latter had ser0ed them by re/istered mail 'ith a co%y of a
%etition for a 'rit of %ossession, 'ith notice that the same 'ould be submitted to the
court of Samar on &eb 27, 1+*0, 3amI that in 0ie' of the co%y and notice ser0ed,
%laintiffs %roceeded to the court from their residence in 2anila accom%anied by their
la'yers only to find that no such %etition had been filedI and that Llamos maliciously
failed to a%%ear in court, so that %laintiffDs e5%enditure and trouble turned out to be in
0ain, causin/ them mental an/uish and undue embarrassment.
#efore Llamos could ans'er the com%laint, he died. C%on lea0e of court,
%laintiffs amended their com%laint to include the heirs of the deceased. $ourt
dismissed the com%laint, sayin/ that the le/al re%resentati0e and not the heirs should
ha0e been made the %arty defendant and that any'ay the action for reco0ery of
money, testate or intestate %roceedin/s should be initiated and the claim filed therein.
-ssueJ
;hether or not maliciously causin/ a %arty to incur unnecessary e5%enses, in1urious
to that %artyDs %ro%erty sur0i0e a/ainst decedentD e5ecutor4 administrator
=eldJ
he action sur0i0es. -t is not included in the actions abated by death
%ro0ided under Section 5, <ule 3,. <ather, it is included under Section 1, <ule 33, as
an action to reco0er dama/es fro an in1ury to %erson or %ro%erty.
H 10 )+n,-asan v. "n, !/+a
&actsJ
9in/lasan, et al filed a case in $&- $a%iz a/ainst "n/ $hia, her son $laro
Lee and one Lee #un in/ to reco0er the o'nershi% and %ossession of a %arcel of
land located in $a%iz and dama/es in the amount of P1A. Subse:uently, %laintiffs filed
a motion for the a%%ointment of a recei0er to 'hich counsel for defendants ob1ected.
he motion 'as 'ithdra'n u%on Ano'led/e of the %endency of intestate %roceedin/s
in the same court, and field an amended com%laint includin/ administratri5 of estate
('ido' "n/ $hia), 'ho 'as already a %arty defendant in her o'n ca%acity and mo0ed
for the increase of her bond and an a%%ointment of a co8administrator.
"dministratri5 then filed motion to dismiss the claim in inter0ention and
ob1ected to the motions.
-ssueJ
;hether or not intestate %roceedin/s should be held in abeyance %endin/
determination of ci0il case a/ainst administratri5
=eldJ
he heirs of an estate may not demand the closin/ of an intestate
%roceedin/ at any time 'here there is a %endin/ case a/ainst administrator. he
%robate court can ri/htfully hold in abeyance the closin/ of the intestate %roceedin/s
until the ci0il case is settled. o hold other'ise 'ould render Section 1,, <ule 7 and
Section 1, <ule 33 nu/atory.
."R&)&S v. :4C"
&"$SJ
Petitioner Se0erino Paredes sued his em%loyer, "u/ust Luntze, for collection of
se%aration and o0ertime %ay in the $&-82anila. Paredes %re0ailed, and Luntze
a%%ealed to the $". Luntze died %endin/ a%%eal and 'as substituted by the
administratri5 of his estate. he $" dismissed the a%%eal for the administratri5Ds
failure to file the %rinted record on a%%eal, and the record of the case 'as remanded.
Paredes filed a motion for e5ecution, so the %ro0incial Sheriff of <izal le0ied on the
%ro%erties of "u/ust Luntze. Paredes 'as the hi/hest bidder at the auction sale
conducted by the Sheriff. -n s%ite of a 2otion to !uash the ;rit of B5ecution filed by
the "dministratri5 still %endin/ resolution, Paredes sold the %ro%erty to co8%etitioner
Kictorio -/nacio. <es%ondent $ourt ()ud/e 2oya) set aside the ;rit of B5ecution and
the Sheriff's Sale and Public "uction of the %ro%erty 'ithout %re1udice to the filin/ of
the 1ud/ment as a claim in the %roceedin/s for settlement of the estate of the
deceased.

-SSCBJ ;4. the $&- correctly set aside the ;rit of B5ecution and the SheriffDs Sale
and Public "uction P ?BS.
=BL9J
-n the case of a money claim 'here the defendant dies 'hile a%%eal is %endin/, the
a%%eal should not be dismissedI it should continue, but the deceased defendant
should be substituted by his le/al re%resentati0eXe5ecutor or administrator of the
estate. -f the lo'er court is affirmed, the %laintiff must /o to the %robate court for an
order directin/ the e5ecutor or administrator to satisfy the 1ud/ment. he $&- that
ori/inally rendered the 1ud/ment has no %o'er to order its e5ecution and le0y on the
%ro%erties of the deceased because the same are already in custodia legis in the
%robate court 'here administration %roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate of the
deceased defendant are already %endin/ (see Section 21, <ule 7)
-f the defendant dies after final 1ud/ment has been rendered by the $&-, as in the case
at bar, the action sur0i0es. he a%%eal should %roceed 'ith the deceased defendant
bein/ substituted by his le/al re%resentati0e. his 'ould %re0ent a useless re%etition
of %resentin/ ane' before the %robate court the e0idence already %resented in the
$&- on the 0alidity of the claim. $onse:uently, contrary to res%ondents' claim, the
1ud/ment a/ainst the deceased Luntze became final and e5ecutoryI it 'as not
arrested by his death.
-t 'as error on the %art of the %laintiff Paredes, no' one of the %etitioners, to ha0e the
money 1ud/ment in his fa0or e5ecuted a/ainst the %ro%erties of the deceased Luntze.
he %ro%er remedy of Paredes should ha0e been to file his claim in the administration
%roceedin/s of the estate of the deceased defendant Luntze because all claims for
money a/ainst the decedent, arisin/ from contract, e5%ress or im%lied, 'hether the
same be due, not due, or contin/ent, all claims for funeral e5%enses and e5%enses for
the last sicAness of the decedent, and 1ud/ment for money a/ainst the decedent, must
be filed 'ithin the time limited in the notice to the creditors.
he res%ondent court correctly nullified the order of e5ecution %ursuant to the
1ud/ment, 'hich became final and e5ecutory, and the corres%ondin/ le0y on e5ecution
and the %ublic auction sale.
he 1ud/ment for money a/ainst the deceased stands in the same footin/ as all
claims for money a/ainst the decedent, arisin/ from contract, e5%ress or im%lied,
'hether the same be due, not due, or contin/ent, all claims for funeral e5%enses and
e5%enses for the last sicAness of the decedent, (1st sentence, Sec. 5, <ule 3* of the
<ules of $ourt), <ule 3* of the <ules of $ourt), althou/h the 0alidity of the money
claim co0ered by a 1ud/ment a/ainst the decedent 'hich has already become final
and e5ecutory can no lon/er be liti/ated in the court 'here administration
%roceedin/s for the settlement of the %ro%erties of the deceased are still %endin/,
unliAe the other money claims 'hose 0alidity may yet be challen/ed by the e5ecutor
or administrator.
he 'rit of e5ecution 'as not the %ro%er %rocedure for the %ayment of debts and
e5%enses of the administration. he %ro%er %rocedure is for the court to order the
administratri5 to maAe the %aymentI and if there is no sufficient cash on hand, to order
the sale of the %ro%erties and out of the %roceeds to %ay the debts and e5%enses of
the administration.
he ordinary %rocedure by 'hich to settle claims of indebtedness a/ainst the estate of
a deceased %erson, as an inheritance ta5, is for the claimant to %resent a claim before
the %robate court so that said court may order the administrator to %ay the amount
thereof.
o such effect is the decision of this $ourt in -ldami% vs" *udge of the .ourt of +irst
/nstance of )indoro, F.<. .o. L827*0, 9ec. 2+, 1+@+, thusJ . . . a writ of execution is
not the proper procedure allowed by the 0ules of .ourt for the payment of debts and
expenses of administration. he %ro%er %rocedure is for the court to order the sale of
%ersonal estate or the sale or mort/a/e of real %ro%erty of the deceased and all debts
or e5%enses of administration should be %aid out of the %roceeds of the sale or
mort/a/e. he order for the sale or mort/a/e should be issued u%on motion of the
administrator and 'ith the 'ritten notice to all the heirs, le/atees and de0isees
residin/ in the Phili%%ines, accordin/ to <ule 3+, section 7, and <ule +0, section 2.
"nd 'hen sale or mort/a/e of real estate is to be made, the re/ulations contained in
<ule +0, section ,, should be com%lied 'ith. B5ecution may issue only 'here the
de0isees, le/atees or heirs ha0e entered into %ossession of their res%ecti0e %ortions
in the estate %rior to settlement and %ayment of the debts and e5%enses of
administration and it is later ascertained that there are such debts and e5%enses to be
%aid, in 'hich case 6the court ha0in/ 1urisdiction of the estate may, by order for that
%ur%ose, after hearin/, settle the amount of their se0eral liabilities, and order ho'
much and in 'hat manner each %erson shall contribute, and may issue execution if
circumstances re:uire6 (<ule 7+, section *I see also <ule ,@, section @I). "nd this is
not the instant case.
he same rule must be a%%lied in connection 'ith money 1ud/ments a/ainst the
deceased that ha0e already become final, such as the money 1ud/ment in fa0or of
Paredes. .o 'rit of e5ecution should issue a/ainst the %ro%erties of the deceased.
he claim for satisfaction of the money 1ud/ment should be %resented in the %robate
court for %ayment by the administrator.
he le/al basis for such a %rocedure is the fact that in the testate or intestate
%roceedin/s to settle the estate of a deceased %erson, the %ro%erties belon/in/ to the
estate are under the 1urisdiction of the court and such 1urisdiction continues until said
%ro%erties ha0e been distributed amon/ the heirs entitled thereto. 9urin/ the
%endency of the %roceedin/s all the estate is in custodia legis and the %ro%er
%rocedure is not to allo' the sheriff, in the case of court 1ud/ment, to seize the
%ro%erties but to asA the court for an order to re:uire the administrator to %ay the
amount due from the estate and re:uired to be %aid. -n this 1urisdiction, a 0oid
1ud/ment or order is in le/al effect no 1ud/ment or order. #y it no ri/hts are di0ested.
&rom it no ri/hts can be obtained. #ein/ 'orthless, it neither binds nor bars anyone.
"ll acts %erformed under it and all claims flo'in/ from it are 0oid.
.C &53 !(453 vs. (45. ". :&L&5!$4 (&RR&R", +n /er 0a2a0+ty as >u*,e o<
t/e !ourt o< 9+rst +nstan0e o< :an+-a, an* >%L$" S4 )& !($"1 G S45S,
res2on*ents.
&"$SJ
(n )une *, 1+*,, the $&-82anila ordered defendants8s%ouses Bduardo Cy $hiat and
$ecilia F. Cy $hiat to %ay %etitioner $hon/, %ursuant to 'hich a 'rit of e5ecution 'as
issued. $hon/ secured a 'rit of e5ecution dated Se%tember 23, 1+*,, but it 'as
returned unsatisfied by the Pro0incial Sheriff of .e/ros (ccidental.
C%on motion of the %etitioner, a &irst "lias ;rit of B5ecution directin/ the Sheriff of the
$ity of 2anila to le0y on the /oods and chattels of the s%ouses, 1ointly and se0erally,
es%ecially their %artici%ation in the /eneral %artnershi% of )ulia So 9e $hiat and Sons,
but this 'as liAe'ise returned unsatisfied. C%on motion of the %etitioner, the trial court
issued a Second "lias ;rit of B5ecution directin/ the Sheriff of .e/ros (ccidental to
le0y on the %ro%erties of the Cy $hiat s%ouses, 1ointly and se0erally, es%ecially their
%artici%ation in the /eneral %artnershi% of the res%ondent )ulia So 9e $hiat U Sons.
(n )une 27, 1+*+, the same Sheriff le0ied u%on the ri/hts, interests and %artici%ation
of the s%ouses o0er the 12 %arcels of land re/istered in the name of res%ondent
/eneral %artnershi%. <es%ondent %artnershi% filed an Cr/ent 2otion to Lift Le0y on
B5ecution alle/in/ that the %ro%erties le0ied u%on by the Sheriff belon/ e5clusi0ely to
said res%ondent and that 1ud/ment debtors ha0e ceased to be members of the
%artnershi%, ha0in/ sold all their ri/hts and %artici%ation therein to )ulia So 9e $hiat,
mother of 1ud/ment debtor Bduardo Cy $hiat. Petitioner o%%osed the motion.
<es%ondent )ud/e /ranted the motion to lift the le0y on e5ecution by orderin/ the
recall of the Second "lias ;rit of B5ecution, statin/ that Bduardo Cy $hiat died on
2arch 70, 1+*3, hence, a 'rit of e5ecution a/ainst him can no lon/er be enforced.
PetitionerDs 2< 'as denied, hence this %etition for certiorari, seeAin/ the nullification
of the orders.
-SSCBJ
;4. the 1ud/ment creditor is under obli/ation to file his claim 'ith the estate of the
deceased 'here no %roceedin/s ha0e been instituted for the settlement of the estate
of said deceased P ?BS.
=BL9J
Petition denied. he basic reason of the res%ondent court in recallin/ the 'rit of
e5ecution 'as that the 1ud/ment bein/ for money and the 1ud/ment debtor ha0in/
died %rior to the le0y, the 1ud/ment creditor should file his claim in the %roceedin/s for
the settlement of the estate of said deceased %ursuant to Section 5 of <ule 3*.
he res%ondent court 'as correct in recallin/ the Second "lias ;rit of B5ecution.
9efendant Bduardo Cy $hiat ha0in/ died on 2arch 70, 1+*3, %rior to the le0y 'hich
'as made by the Pro0incial Sheriff of .e/ros (ccidental on )une 27, 1+*+, the
1ud/ment in fa0or of %etitioner, bein/ one for a sum of money, may no lon/er be
enforced by means of the said 'rit of e5ecution, but must be filed in the %ro%er estate
%roceedin/s. his is in consonance 'ith the rule laid do'n in Section 5 of <ule 3* of
the <ules of $ourt. he abo0e8:uoted %ro0ision is mandatory. his re:uirement is for
the %ur%ose of %rotectin/ the estate of the deceased by informin/ the e5ecutor or
administrator of the claims a/ainst it, thus enablin/ him to e5amine each claim and to
determine 'hether it is a %ro%er one 'hich should be allo'ed. he %lain and ob0ious
desi/n of the rule is the s%eedy settlement of the affairs of the deceased and the early
deli0ery of the %ro%erty to the distributees, le/atees, or heirs. he la' strictly re:uires
the %rom%t %resentation and dis%osition of claims a/ainst the decedent's estate in
order to settle the affairs of the estate as soon as %ossible, %ay off its debts and
distribute the residue
*

=ad the le0y been made before the death of the 1ud/ment debtor, the sale on
e5ecution could ha0e been carried to com%letion in accordance 'ith Section , (c) of
<ule 7+ 'hich %ro0ides that in case the 1ud/ment debtor dies after e5ecution is
actually levied u%on any of his %ro%erty, the same may be sold for the satisfaction of
the 1ud/ment. =o'e0er, this is not the case here.
Petitioner contends that he could not %resent his claim in the %ro%er estate
%roceedin/s because no such %roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate of the
deceased Bduardo Cy $hiat ha0e been instituted. =o'e0er, the <ules of $ourt
%ro0ide a remedy for %etitioner. =e may initiate %roceedin/s under Section 1 of <ule
,* of the <ules of $ourt if Bduardo Cy $hiat died testate, or under Section * (b) of
<ule ,3 if he died intestate.
-f a creditor, ha0in/ Ano'led/e of the death of his debtor and the fact that no
administrator has been a%%ointed, %ermits more than three years to ela%se 'ithout
asAin/ for the a%%ointment of an administrator or institutin/ the intestate %roceedin/s
in the com%etent court for the settlement of the latter's estate, he is /uilty of laches
and his claim %rescribes.

o hold other'ise 'ould be to %ermit a creditor ha0in/
Ano'led/e of the debtor's death to Aee% the latter's estate in sus%ense indefinitely, by
not institutin/ either estate or intestate %roceedin/s in order to %resent his claim, to
the %re1udice of the heirs and le/atees.
S.4%S&S 8&5$14 :"5"L"5S"5 an* $5&S 7$1%3-:"5"L"5S"5, 2et+t+oner,
vs.
(45. :"R$"54 !"S1"5&)", >R., 2res+*+n, >u*,e, 8ran0/ $$$, !9$ o<
.a;2an,a; ")4R"!$45 7)". )& )"5"5, <or /erse-< an* as a*;+n+strat+I o<
t/e &S1"1& 49 )4:$5")4R )"5"5, S2e0. .ro0. 5o. 3-22, !9$ 8ran0/ $$,
.a;2an,a, res2on*ents.
&"$SJ
S%ouses 9ominador and "doration 9anan mort/a/ed their fish8%ond and residential
lot in Pam%an/a in fa0or of %etitioner8s%ouses #enito 2analansan and -nes Kitu/8
2analansan, to /uarantee %ayment of money. "s the mort/a/ors did not %ay
not'ithstandin/ demands, an action for the foreclosure of the mort/a/e 'as filed 'ith
the $&-8Pam%an/a. )ud/ment 'as rendered in fa0or of the %laintiffs. he s%ouses
9anan a%%ealed to the $", 'hich modified the 1ud/ment by eliminatin/ %ayment of
moral dama/es. 9issatisfied, the defendant s%ouses filed a %etition for re0ie' 'ith the
S$, but this 'as denied.
-n due time, the records of the case 'ere remanded to the court belo' and u%on
a%%lication, a 'rit of e5ecution 'as issued on )anuary 17, 1+,5, but 'hen the sheriff
'as about to le0y u%on the mort/a/ed %ro%erties, res%ondent "doracion 9anan
o%%osed the le0y on e5ecution and filed a motion to set aside the 'rit of e5ecution for
the follo'in/ reasonsJ the %ro%erties are in custodia legis and the 1ud/ment should be
%resented as a money claim in the -ntestate Bstate of 9ominador 9anan, %ursuant to
Sec. 5 , <ule 3* of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt since 9ominador 9anan died on
.o0ember ,, 1+,0, 'hile the case 'as %endin/ a%%eal before the $ourt of "%%eals
and intestate %roceedin/s for the settlement of his estate had already been instituted.
he res%ondent )ud/e ordered the settin/ aside the 'rit of e5ecution.
he %etitionersD 2< 'as denied. he s%ouses 2analansan filed a %etition to annul the
order, and to direct the res%ondent )ud/e to %roceed 'ith the e5ecution of the
1ud/ment rendered in the foreclosure %roceedin/s.
-SSCBJ ;4. res%ondent )ud/e acted correctly in settin/ aside the 'rit of e5ecution P
.(. here 'as F"9LB).
=BL9J Petition /ranted. Petitioners contend that the res%ondent )ud/e abused his
discretion, amountin/ to lacA of 1urisdiction, in dele/atin/ the e5ecution of a 1ud/ment
to the %robate court, 'hich has no 1urisdiction to enforce a lien on %ro%erty.
here is merit in the contention. o be/in 'ith, the sa0in/ clause in Sec. ,, <ule 3* of
the <e0ised <ules of $ourt, 'hich the res%ondent )ud/e re:uired to be %erformed
and the obser0ance of 'hich he /a0e as reason for settin/ aside the 'rit of e5ecution
he had %re0iously caused to be issued, and in dele/atin/ the authority to e5ecute the
1ud/ment in the foreclosure %roceedin/s to the %robate court, does not confer
1urisdiction u%on the %robate court, of limited 1urisdiction, to enforce a mort/a/e lien.
.or can it be relied u%on as sufficient /round to dele/ate the e5ecution of the
1ud/ment of foreclosure to the %robate court. he rule merely reser0es a ri/ht to the
e5ecutor or administrator of an estate to redeem a mort/a/ed or %led/ed %ro%erty of a
decedent 'hich the mort/a/e or %led/ee has o%ted to foreclose, instead of filin/ a
money claim 'ith the %robate court, under said Section , of <ule 3*. ;hile the
redem%tion is sub1ect to the a%%ro0al of the %robate court, the e5ercise of the ri/ht is
discretionary u%on the said e5ecutor or administrator and may not be ordered by the
%robate court u%on its o'n motion.
#esides, the action filed herein is for the foreclosure of a mort/a/e, or an action to
enforce a lien on %ro%erty. Cnder Sec. 1, <ule 3, of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt, it is
an action 'hich sur0i0es. #ein/ so, the 1ud/ment rendered therein may be enforced
by a 'rit of e5ecution.
-n the case of Testamentaria de 1on -madeo )atute 2lave vs" .anlas, the $ourt
ruled that an action to enforce a lien on %ro%erty may be %rosecuted by the interested
%erson a/ainst the e5ecutor or administrator inde%endently of the testate or intestate
%roceedin/s for the reason that such claims cannot in any 1ust sense be considered
claims a/ainst the estate, but the ri/ht to sub1ect s%ecific %ro%erty to the claim arises
from the contract of the debtor 'hereby ha has durin/ life set aside certain %ro%erty
for its %ayment, and such property does not, except in so far as its value may exceed
the debt, belong to the estate"
Since the mort/a/ed %ro%erty in :uestion does not belon/ to the estate of the late
Sal0ador 9anan, accordin/ to the fore/oin/ rule, the conclusion is reasonable that the
%robate court has no 1urisdiction o0er the %ro%erty in :uestion, and that the
res%ondent )ud/e had abused his discretion in dele/atin/ the e5ecution of the
1ud/ment to the %robate court.
he fact that the defendant Sal0ador 9anan died before, and not after the decision of
the $ourt of "%%eal became final and e5ecutory 'ill not nullify the 'rit of e5ecution
already issued. hus, in )iranda, vs" -bbas, 1ud/ment 'as rendered t'o months
before the death of the defendant. Since neither the defendant nor his heirs after his
death a%%ealed from the 1ud/ment, the 'rit of e5ecution 'as issued as a matter of
course. he death of the defendant 'as communicated to the trial court si5 months
after the decision had become final. he successors of the decedent contended that
the 'rit of e5ecution issued 'as 0oid because contrary to Section ,, <ule 7+, the
defendant died before, not after, the entry of 1ud/ment. he $ourt re1ected the theory,
sayin/ that Section ,, <ule 7+ cannot be so construed as to in0alidate the 'rit of
e5ecution already issued in so far as ser0ice thereof u%on the heirs or successors8in8
interest of the defendant is concerned. -t merely indicates a/ainst 'hom the 'rit of
e5ecution is to be enforced 'hen the losin/ %arty dies after the entry of 1ud/ment or
order. .othin/ therein, nor in the entire <ule 7+, to our mind, e0en as much as
intimates that a 'rit of e5ecution issued after a %arty dies, 'hich death occurs before
entry of the 1ud/ment, is a nullity. he 'rit may yet be enforced a/ainst his e5ecutor or
administrator, if there be any, or his successors8in8interest.
he res%ondent )ud/e committed an error and acted 'ith /ra0e abuse of discretion in
settin/ aside the 'rit of e5ecution and in orderin/ that the 1ud/ment be ser0ed on the
administratri5 of the estate of the late 9ominador 9anan, throu/h the intestate court,
#ranch -- of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of Pam%an/a, 'ith his indorsement for the
e5ecution of the 1ud/ment.
S"1%R5$54 ". 1"5(%&!4, 2et+t+oner,
vs.
(45. "5)R&S "3%$L"R, .res+*+n, >u*,e, 8ran0/ $$, !ourt o< 9+rst $nstan0e o<
.a;2an,a, R4S"R$4 S4R$"54 7)". )& 3%$"4, &1 "L., res2on*ents.
&"$SJ
Petitioner4lessor filed 'ith the $ity $ourt of "n/eles $ity a com%laint for unla'ful
detainer a/ainst lessee )ulian Fuiao, deceased, %rayin/ that the latter be ordered to
0acate the buildin/ bein/ leased and to %ay the rentals in arrears. FuiaoDs defense
'as that %etitioner did not introduce certain re%airs on the leased %remises and that
he did not deal 'ith %etitioner, 'ith a counterclaim for dama/es. he $ity $ourt
ordered Fuiao to 0acate the leased %remises and to %ay the rentals in arrears. Fuiao
a%%ealed from said 9ecision to the $&-8Pam%an/a, %uttin/ u% the re:uired
su%ersedeas bond. (n 13 .o0ember 1+*, )ulian Fuiao died. Fuiao's counsel filed a
motion for substitution, and res%ondent )ud/e issued an (rder orderin/ the
substitution of the other res%ondents in lieu of deceased Fuiao as %arties8defendants.
-n 2arch 1+*3 the ne' defendants 0acated the leased %remises.
)une 1+*3, res%ondents filed a motion to dismiss, alle/in/ that all rentals that accrued
durin/ the %endency of the a%%eal in the $&- had been %aid, that 'hat remain to be
liti/ated are the un%aid rentals that accrued durin/ the %endency of the case in the
$ity $ourtI conse:uently, the remainin/ issue has been reduced to a mere claim for
money, thus the $&- has no 1urisdiction to hear and decide a claim for money, and that
1urisdiction belon/s to the %robate court.
Petitioner o%%osed the motion to dismiss, statin/ that res%ondents 'ere esto%%ed
from seeAin/ dismissal, ha0in/ %re0iously filed a motion for substitution 'hich 'as
/ranted by the $ourt, and that the claim in0ol0ed is not mere claim for money but is in
the nature of dama/es arisin/ from the unla'ful 'ithholdin/ of the %ossession of real
%ro%erty.
<es%ondent 1ud/e issued an (rder dismissin/ the case on the /round that an action
for un%aid rentals, 'hich is a claim for a sum of money, cannot be maintained a/ainst
the heirs of a deceased defendant. =ence, this %etition for re0ie' by certiorari directed
a/ainst the (rder of dismissal.
-SSCBJ ;4. the un%aid rentals are 6money claims,6 'ithin the meanin/ of Section 21
of <ule 7 8 ?BS
=BL9J
Sec. 21, <ule 7 %ro0ides that 'hen the action is for reco0ery of money, debt or
interest there'ith, and the defendant dies before final 1ud/ment in the $&-, it shall be
dismissed to be %rosecuted in the manner es%ecially %ro0ided in these rules. he
reference is to the corres%ondin/ testate or intestate %roceedin/ for the settlement of
the estate of the deceased, 'herein all his creditors may a%%ear and file their claims
so that the same may be %aid %ro%ortionately out of the said estate. Section 1 of <ule
3, statesJ .o action u%on a claim for the reco0ery of money or debt or interest
thereon shall be commenced a/ainst the e5ecutor or administratorI but actions to
reco0er real or %ersonal %ro%erty, or an interest therein, from the estate, or to enforce
a lien thereon, and actions to reco0er dama/es for an in1ury to %erson or %ro%erty, real
or %ersonal, may be commenced a/ainst him.
-f the un%aid rentals in :uestion here are 6money claims6 under the fore/oin/ rules,
they do not sur0i0e, but must be %resented a/ainst the estate in the %robate court.
=o'e0er, in a case of e1ectment, or unla'ful detainer, the main issue is %ossession of
the %ro%erty, to 'hich the ri/ht to reco0er dama/es for the 'ithholdin/ of such
%ossession after the ri/ht thereto has terminated is only incidentalI and the rents
accrued and un%aid are sim%ly the measure for the determination of such dama/es.
he action for e1ectment itself is not abated by the death of the defendant, but must
continue until final 1ud/ment, in 'hich the :uestion of dama/es must be ad1udicated.
he fact that the occu%ants of the tenement sub1ect of the action 0acated the same
durin/ the %endency of the case on a%%eal does not di0est the reco0erable dama/es
of their character as an incident in the main action and con0ert them into sim%le
claims for money 'hich must be %rosecuted a/ainst the estate in the administration
%roceedin/. he issue concernin/ the ille/ality of the defendant's %ossession is still
ali0e, and u%on its resolution de%ends the corollary issue of 'hether, and ho' much,
dama/es may be reco0ered.
(n the other hand, if the res%ondents' act of 0acatin/ the buildin/ sub1ect of the case
be construed as abandonment of their a%%eal, then the 1ud/ment a%%ealed from
'ould ac:uire the character of finality, and thus %reclude the necessity of filin/ the
claim for un%aid rentals before the %robate court.
he order com%lained of is set aside, and the case is remanded to the trial court for
further %roceedin/s.

9"8$"5" !. 7)". )& S"L"6"R, 2et+t+oner,
vs.
!4%R1 49 "..&"LS, .R$:$1$74 5&.4:%!&54 an* &:&R&5!$"5"
5&.4:%!&54, res2on*ents.

&"$SJ
<es%ondents .e%omuceno filed se%arate com%laints for e1ectment

'ith the $ourt of
"/rarian <elations of 2alolos, #ulacan a/ainst %etitioner's deceased husband,
#en1amin Salazar. he trial court ruled in fa0or of %ri0ate res%ondents. he $" denied
the %etitionerDs a%%eal. "lmost a year after the termination of that a%%eal, the same
trial court decision sub1ect thereof 'as once a/ain assailed before the $" throu/h a
%etition

for annulment of 1ud/ment. Petitioner assailed the same trial court decision as
ha0in/ been rendered by a court that did not ha0e 1urisdiction o0er her and the other
heirs of her deceased husband because not'ithstandin/ the fact that her husband
had already died on (ctober 7, 1++1, the trial court still %roceeded to render its
decision on "u/ust 27, 1++7 'ithout effectin/ the substitution of heirs in accordance
'ith Section 1,, <ule 7, of the <ules of $ourt thereby de%ri0in/ her of her day in
court.
Petitioner, not ha0in/ asserted the matter of fraud or collusion in her %etition for
annulment of 1ud/ment, the $" decided the same on the basis of the sole issue of
non81urisdiction resultin/ from the alle/ed de%ri0ation of %etitioner's ri/ht to due
%rocess and u%held the trial court decision. PetitionerDs 2< 'as denied.
-SSCBJ ;4. the lo'er court had 1urisdiction o0er %etitioners P yes.
=BL9J
Petition denied. he need for substitution of heirs is based on the ri/ht to due %rocess
accruin/ to e0ery %arty in any %roceedin/.

he rationale underlyin/ this re:uirement in
case a %arty dies durin/ the %endency of %roceedin/s of a nature not e5tin/uished by
such death, is that the e5ercise of 1udicial %o'er to hear and determine a cause
im%licitly %resu%%oses in the trial court, amon/st other essentials, 1urisdiction o0er the
%ersons of the %arties.
he defendant in an e1ectment case ha0in/ died before the rendition by the trial court
of its decision therein, its failure to effectuate a formal substitution of heirs before its
rendition of 1ud/ment, does not in0alidate such 1ud/ment 'here the heirs themsel0es
a%%eared before the trial court, %artici%ated in the %roceedin/s therein, and %resented
e0idence in defense of deceased defendant, it undeniably bein/ e0ident that the heirs
themsel0es sou/ht their day in court and e5ercised their ri/ht to due %rocess.
he $" correctly ruled that e1ectment, bein/ an action in0ol0in/ reco0ery of real
%ro%erty, is a real action 'hich as such, is not e5tin/uished by the defendant's death.
he :uestion as to 'hether an action sur0i0es or not de%ends on the nature of the
action and the dama/e sued for. -n the causes of action 'hich sur0i0e, the 'ron/
com%lained affects %rimarily and %rinci%ally %ro%erty and %ro%erty ri/hts, the in1uries to
the %erson bein/ merely incidental, 'hile in the causes of action 'hich do not sur0i0e,
the in1ury com%lained of is to the %erson, the %ro%erty and ri/hts of %ro%erty affected
bein/ incidental.

here is no dis%ute that an e1ectment case sur0i0es the death of a %arty, 'hich death
did not e5tin/uish the deceased's ci0il %ersonality.

2ore si/nificantly, a 1ud/ment in an
e1ectment case is conclusi0e bet'een the %arties and their successors in interest by
title subse:uent to the commencement of the action. &urthermore, 1ud/ment in an
e1ectment case may be enforced not only a/ainst defendants therein but also a/ainst
the members of their family, their relati0es, or %ri0ies 'ho deri0e their ri/ht of
%ossession from the defendants ;hile it is true that a decision in an action for
e1ectment is enforceable not only a/ainst the defendant himself but also a/ainst
members of his family, his relati0es, and his %ri0ies 'ho deri0ed their ri/ht of
%ossession from the defendant and his successors8in8interest,

it had been established
that %etitioner had, by her o'n acts, submitted to the 1urisdiction of the trial court. She
is no' esto%%ed to deny that she had been heard in defense of her deceased
husband in the %roceedin/s therein.
9L4R&5)4, >R., &1 "L. vs. !4L4:", &1 "L
9"!1S'
" %etition for certiorari 'ith %reliminary in1unction. Salindon, an a'ardee of a
Phili%%ine =omesite and =ousin/ $or%oration (P==$) lot filed a com%laint for
e1ectment a/ainst ;illiam Kas:uez and Sil0erio .icolas 'ith the res%ondent court. -n
her com%laint, Salindon alle/ed that the defendants 'ere s:uatters occu%yin/ her
%ro%erty.
Salindon died. here 'as no substitution of %arty. he case 'as remanded to the city
court. he deceased Salindon continued to be an ad0erse %arty.
$" e0entually dismissed SalindonDs a%%eal.
$SS%&'
;4. the lo'er court should taAe 1udicial notice of SalindonDs death.
(&L)'
Salindon's counsel after her death failed to inform the court of the death. he
a%%ellate court could not be e5%ected to Ano' or taAe 1udicial notice of the death of
Salindon 'ithout the %ro%er manifestation from counsel. he a%%ellate court 'as 'ell
'ithin its 1urisdiction to %roceed as it did 'ith the case.
his is one such case 'here the successors8in8 interest of the ori/inal %laintiff are
esto%%ed from :uestionin/ the 1urisdiction of the res%ondent court. "dela Salindon,
the ori/inal %laintiff in the e1ectment case consistently maintained her stand that the
res%ondent court had 1urisdiction o0er the e1ectment com%laint.
!(&5 7. "5)R")&
9"!1S'
his is an administrati0e case filed by "n/ LeA $hen a/ainst res%ondent )ud/e
"malia <. "ndrade for serious misconduct, /ross inefficiency, and e5treme bias and
%artiality.
-n a KB<-&-B9 $(2PL"-., com%lainant char/ed res%ondent )ud/e 'ith serious
inefficiency and serious misconduct for claimin/ that durin/ one of the hearin/s of the
case, %laintiffDs counsel manifested before the $ourt that the other defendant, 2r. ui
=oA, died on )anuary 5, 1++0. 9es%ite admission of %laintiffDs counsel of the fact of
death of 2r. ui =oA, res%ondent court Ae%t on sendin/ orders and notices to the
deceased, 'hich, accordin/ to com%lainant, is in 0iolation of the <ule that no court
can ac:uire 1urisdiction o0er a dead %erson.
$SS%&'
;4. res%ondent 1ud/e should be held liable.
(&L)'
;ith res%ect to the char/e that notices and orders continued to be sent to defendant
ui =oA, res%ondent 1ud/e e5%lained that it 'as because no %roof had been submitted
to her court to %ro0e the re%orted death of defendant ui =oA.
<es%ondent 1ud/e contended that com%lainant had failed to substantiate the char/es
of her alle/ed character deficiencies and 0indicti0eness. (ffice of the $ourt
"dministrator recommended and S$ held 'ith the e5ce%tion of the char/e relati0e to
the care and custody of case records, that the com%laint a/ainst res%ondent )ud/e
"malia <. "ndrade be 9-S2-SSB9 for failure to substantiate the char/es.
SC 7S. &%9&:$4
9"!1S'
" %etition for re0ie' by certiorari of an order of the )u0enile and 9omestic <elations
$ourt of 2anila, dismissin/ said case on the /round that the death of %laintiff, $armen
Sy, 'hich occurred durin/ the %endency of the case, abated the cause of action as
'ell as the action itself. he dismissal order 'as issued o0er the ob1ection of the heir
of the deceased %laintiff 'ho sou/ht to substitute the deceased and to ha0e the case
%rosecuted to final 1ud/ment.
$armen Sy filed a %etition for le/al se%aration a/ainst Bufemio. #efore the trial could
be com%leted, %etitioner died. $ounsel for %etitioner duly notified the court of her
death.

$SS%&'
;4. the death of the %laintiff before final decree in an action for le/al se%aration
abates the action.
(&L)'
"n action for le/al se%aration 'hich in0ol0es nothin/ more than the bed8and8board
se%aration of the s%ouses (there bein/ no absolute di0orce in this 1urisdiction) is
%urely %ersonal. he $i0il $ode of the Phili%%ines reco/nizes this in its "rticle 100, by
allo'in/ only the innocent s%ouse (and no one else) to claim le/al se%arationI and in
its "rticle 103, by %ro0idin/ that the s%ouses can, by their reconciliation, sto% or abate
the %roceedin/s and e0en rescind a decree of le/al se%aration already rendered.
#ein/ %ersonal in character, it follo's that the death of one %arty to the action causes
the death of the action itself X actio personalis moritur cum persona"
3%1$&RR&6, >r vs. :"!"5)43
9"!1S'
" %etition for certiorari seeAs to annul t'o orders of the res%ondent 1ud/e of the $&- of
.e/ros (ccidental. he first order authorized the release of P50,000.00 to the %ri0ate
res%ondent to be taAen from the loan secured by the estate of "/ustin Futierrez, Sr.,
from the Phili%%ine .ational #anA (P.#)I and the second denied the motion for
reconsideration 'hich 'as filed by the heirs of the decedent.
he administratri5 filed a 0erified 2otion to <econsider (rder and for an (rder
9irectin/ the P.# .ot to <elease "ny ;ithdra'als.
$SS%&'
;4. the claim for su%%ort should be char/ed to the estate.
(&L)'
he res%ondent Bl%edia's claim for su%%ort should not ha0e been addressed to the
estate of "/ustin Futierrez, Sr.
;hen the first :uestioned order 'as issued by the res%ondent 1ud/e, 2auricio
Futierrez 'as still ali0e. -n fact, he 'as one of those 'ho o%%osed such order.
<es%ondent 1ud/e had no authority to issue the said order because she Ane' fully
'ell that the claim had no le/ to stand on as Bl%edia 'as not an heir to the estate and
the decedent had no obli/ation 'hatsoe0er to /i0e her su%%ort. <es%ondent Bl%edia,
at this %oint, should ha0e asAed for su%%ort pendente lite before the 1u0enile court
'here the action for le/al se%aration 'hich 'as filed by her husband 'as %endin/.
hen, 'hen 2auricio Futierrez died, she should ha0e filed an action for the settlement
of estate of her husband 'here she and her children could recei0e such allo'ance as
may be directed by the court under Section 7, <ule 37 of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt.
herefore, the second order is also null and 0oid for bein/ 'ithout any le/al basis.
)4:$534 vs. 3"RL$14S, &1 "L.
9"!1S'
" %etition for certiorari and mandamus a/ainst )ud/e Farlitos, seeAin/ to annul
certain orders of the court and for an order in the S$ directin/ res%ondent court to
e5ecute 1ud/ment in fa0or of the Fo0ernment a/ainst the estate of ;alter Scott Price
for internal re0enue ta5es.
-n an earlier case, the S$ declared as final and e5ecutory the order for the %ayment
by the estate of the estate and inheritance ta5es, char/es and %enalties, issued by the
$&- of Leyte in, s%ecial %roceedin/s .o. 1@ entitled 6-n the matter of the -ntestate
Bstate of the Late ;alter Scott Price.6 -n order to enforce the claims a/ainst the estate
the fiscal %resented a %etition to the court belo' for the e5ecution of the 1ud/ment.
he %etition 'as, ho'e0er, denied by the court 'hich held that the e5ecution is not
1ustifiable as the Fo0ernment is indebted to the estate under administration.
$SS%&'
;4. the %etition for certiorari and mandamus should be /ranted.
(&L)'
he %etition to set aside the abo0e orders of the court belo' and for the e5ecution of
the claim of the Fo0ernment a/ainst the estate must be denied for lacA of merit. he
ordinary %rocedure by 'hich to settle claims of indebtedness a/ainst the estate of a
deceased %erson, as an inheritance ta5, is for the claimant to %resent a claim before
the %robate court so that said court may order the administrator to %ay the amount
thereof.
"-*a;+z vs. >u*,e o< t/e !9$ o< :+n*oro
9"!1S' Santia/o <ementeria, the decedent 'as a member of the commercial
%artnershi% G"ldamiz y <ementeriaE. he other members 'ere his brothers Fa0ino
and )ose "ldamiz. <ementeria died in 1+7,, and a %robate %roceedin/ 'as instituted
in the same year in the $&- of 2indoro, by Fa0ino "ldamiz, re%resented by "tty. )uan
Luna. "ldamiz 'as a%%ointed administrator, and 'as re%resented by "tty. Luna until
1+@,, 'hen the order com%lained of 'as issued.
(n )anuary 15, 1+@,, after 10 years from the date of a%%ointment, Fa0ino, throu/h
"tty. Luna, submitted his accounts, and a %ro1ect for %artition 'ith a 0ie' to closin/ the
%roceedin/s. he court a%%ro0ed the accounts but refused to a%%ro0e the %ro1ect for
%artition unless all debts includin/ attorneys fees be first %aid.
-n the %ro1ect of %artition, it 'as e5%ressly stated that attorneys fees, debts and
incidental e5%enses 'ould be %ro%ortionately %aid by the beneficiaries after the
closure of the testate %roceedin/s, but the court refused to sanction this clause of the
%ro1ect.
-t if for this reason that, "tty. Luna, 'ithout %re0iously %re%arin/ and filin/ a 'ritten
%etition to ha0e his %rofessional fees fi5ed and 'ithout %re0ious notice to all interested
%arties, submitted e0idence of his ser0ices and %rofessional standin/ so the court
mi/ht fi5 the amount for com%ensation and the administrator may maAe %ayment. his
failure 'as not due to bad faith or fraudulent %ur%ose but to an honest belief that such
re:uirements 'ere not necessary under the circumstances.
"t the time res%ondents e0idence 'as submitted to the court, Fa0ino and )ose
"ldamiz 'ere residin/ in the Phili%%ines and other interested %arties 'ere residin/ in
S%ain. .o 'ritten claim had e0er been filed for res%ondents fees, and the interested
%arties had not been notified thereof nor of the hearin/, not e0en the administrator
Fa0ino "ldamiz 'ho did not Ano' 'hen he 'as called to testify that he 'ould testify in
connection 'ith res%ondents fees.
he court ordered %ayment of P23,000. Fa0ino made a %ayment of 5,000, but did not
%ay the rest. "fter se0eral demands, "tty. Luna filed a motion for e5ecution 'hich 'as
/ranted by the court, 'hich resulted in the le0yin/ of t'o %arcels of land o'ned by the
commercial %artnershi% G"ldamiz y <ementeria.
$SS%&' ;as the order of the court 0alid>
(&L)' he fi5in/ of the amount of "ttorneys fees by the court is null and 0oid. "s
such, the order of e5ecution is also null and 0oid.
he correct %rocedure for the collection of attorneyDs fees, is for the counsel to re:uest
the administrator to maAe %ayment and file an action a/ainst him in his %ersonal
ca%acity, and not as an administrator should he fail to %ay. -f 1ud/ement is rendered
a/ainst the administrator and he %ays, he may include the fees so %aid in his account
to the court. he attorney may, instead of brin/in/ such action, file a %etition in the
testate or intestate %roceedin/, asAin/ that the court, after notice to all %ersons
interested, allo' his claim and direct the administrator to %ay it as an e5%ense of
administration.
-n this case, no 'ritten %etition for the %ayment of atty.Ds fees has e0er been filed and
the interested %arties had not been %re0iously notified thereof nor of the hearin/ held
by the court. hus, the orders issued by the $ourt are null and 0oid as ha0in/ been
issued in e5cess of 1urisdiction.
he order of e5ecution 'as declared by the $ourt as null and 0oid because a 'rit of
e5ecution 'as not the %ro%er %rocedure allo'ed by the <ules of $ourt for the %ayment
of debts and e5%enses of administration.
he %ro%er %rocedure 'as for the court to order the sale of %ersonal estate or the sale
or mort/a/e of real %ro%erty of the deceased and all debts or e5%enses of
administration should be %aid out of the %roceeds of the sale or mort/a/e.
)e 8aut+sta vs. )e 3uz;an
9"!1S' #autista, the father of the a%%ellees, 'as a %assen/er in a )ee%ney o'ned
and o%erated by Fuzman. hey )ee%ney fi/ured in an accident due to the
recAlessness of the dri0er and #autista. he dri0er 'as con0icted of recAless
im%rudence, and ordered to indemnify the heirs of #autista. " 'rit of e5ecution 'as
issued to the dri0er, but the same 'as returned to the court unsatisfied.
"fter'ards, 9e Fuzman died. 9ue to the failure of the heirs of #autista to claim from
the dri0er (2edrano), they filed a com%laint a/ainst the 9e Fuzmans alle/in/ that,
other than the abo0e mentioned incidents, that they demanded from 9e Fuzman and
from his family, the %ayment of P7,000 as subsidiary liability, %lus actual, e5em%lary
and moral dama/es, and attorneys fees, but they refused to %ay. he 9e FuzmanDs
filed a motion to dismiss.
he lo'er court sustained the motion, statin/ that the %rocedure for a money claimant
a/ainst a deceased %erson as in the instant case, is for the claimant to file
%roceedin/s for the o%enin/ of 1udicial administration of the estate of said deceased
%erson and to %resent his claim in said %roceedin/s. =e may only %roceed to sue the
heirs directly if such heirs ha0e entered into an e5tra81udicial %artition of such estate
and ha0e distributed the latter amon/ themsel0es, in 'hich case, the heirs become
liable to the claimant in the %ro%ortion to the share 'hich they ha0e recei0ed as
inheritance. his order became final.
Soon after, the a similar com%laint 'as filed, statin/ analo/ous alle/ations, but further
alle/in/ that 9e Fuzman died intestate, and a %ro1ect of %artition for his estate 'as
%resented and a%%ro0ed by the court, and that said intestate %roceedin/s 'ere
closed. (nce a/ain, they made a claim for dama/es, and the 9e Fuzmans once
a/ain filed a motion to dismiss based on the same /rounds. -n this case, the motion to
dismiss 'as denied.
$SS%&' 'hether or not the trial court erred 'hen it /a0e due course to the com%laint
stated abo0e>
(&L)' he court should not ha0e allo'ed the com%laint to %ros%er. he #autistaDs
lost their ri/ht to reco0er because of ne/li/ence and their failure to follo' mandatory
%ro0isions of the rules. hey o0erlooAed the fact that they 'ere no lon/er suin/
<osendo de Fuzman, but his heirs.
Sec. 5 <ule 3* %ro0idesJ all claims for money a/ainst the decedent arisin/ from the
contract, e5%ress or im%lied, 'hether the same be due, not due, or contin/ent, all
claims for funeral e5%enses and e5%enses for the last sicAness of the decedents, and
1ud/ement for money a/ainst the decedent, must be filed 'ithin the time limited in the
noticeI other'ise they are barred fore0er, e5ce%t that they may be set forth as
counterclaims in any action that the e5ecutor or administrator may brin/ a/ainst the
claimants 5 5 5 $laims not yet due, or contin/ent may be a%%ro0ed at their %resent
0alue.
he abo0e :uoted rule is mandatory. herefore u%on the dismissal of the first
com%laint of the #autistas, they should ha0e %resented their claims before the
intestate %roceedin/s filed in the same court. -nstead, they sle%t on their ri/ht. hey
allo'ed the %roceedin/s to terminate and the %ro%erties to be distributed to the heirs
%ursuant to a %ro1ect of %artition before institutin/ this se%arate action. his is not
sanctioned by the rules. his constitutes a bar to a subse:uent claim or similar action.
herefore it 'as an error on the %art of the trial court to hold that they had a cause of
action a/ainst the 9e Fuzmans.
he only instance 'here a creditor can file an action a/ainst a distributee of the
debtorDs asset is under section 5 of rule 33. (%lease refer to the rule). #ut e0en under
that rule, the contin/ent claim must first ha0e been established and allo'ed in the
%robate court before the creditors can file an action directly a/ainst the distributes.
Such is not the situation ho'e0er in the case at bar. he com%laint 'as filed after the
intestate %roceedin/s had terminated and the estate finally distributed to the heirs. -f
'e are to allo' the com%laint to %ros%er, and the trial court to taAe co/nizance of the
same, then the rules %ro0idin/ for the claims a/ainst the estate in a testate or
intestate %roceedin/ 'ithin a definite %eriod 'ould be rendered nu/atory as a
subse:uent action for money claim a/ainst the distributees may be filed
inde%endently of such %roceedin/s. his %recisely is 'hat the rule seeAs to %re0ent so
as to a0oid further delays in the settlement of the estate of the deceased and in the
distribution of his %ro%erty to the heirs, le/atees or de0isees.
3.R. 5o. L-1130 40tober #, 1918
R4:"5 >"%!$"5 vs. 9R"5!$S!4 Q%&R4L
9"!1S' -n (ctober, 1+03, Lino 9ayandante and =ermene/ilda <o/ero e5ecuted a
%ri0ate 'ritin/ in 'hich they acAno'led/ed themsel0es to be indebted to <oman
)aucian in the sum of P17,772.77. =ermene/ilda <o/ero si/ned this document in the
ca%acity of surety for Lino 9ayandanteI but it a%%ears from the instrument itself both
debtors bound themsel0es 1ointly and se0erally to the creditor.
-n .o0ember, 1+0+, <o/ero brou/ht an action in the $ourt of &irst -nstance of "lbay
a/ainst )aucian, asAin/ that the document in :uestion be canceled as to her u%on the
/round that her si/nature 'as obtained by means of fraud. -n his ans'er to the
com%laint, )aucian, by 'ay of cross8com%laint, asAed for 1ud/ment a/ainst the %laintiff
for the amount due u%on the obli/ation, 'hich a%%ears to ha0e matured at that time.
)ud/ment 'as rendered in fa0or of <o/ero, from 'hich 1ud/ment the )aucian
a%%ealed to the Su%reme $ourt.
;hile the case 'as %endin/, <o/ero died and the administrator of her estate, !uerol,
'as substituted as the %arty %laintiff and a%%ellee. (n .o0ember 25, 1+17, the
Su%reme $ourt rendered in its decision re0ersin/ the 1ud/ment of the trial court and
holdin/ that the dis%uted claim 'as 0alid.
9urin/ the %endency of the a%%eal, %roceedin/s 'ere had in the $ourt of &irst
-nstance of "lbay for the administration of the estate of <o/ero. " committee 'as
a%%ointed to %ass u%on claims a/ainst the estate. his committee made its re%ort on
Se%tember 7, 1+12.
(n 2arch 2@, 1+1@, or about a year and half after the filin/ of the re%ort of the
committee on claims a/ainst the <o/ero estate, )aucian entered an a%%earance in
the estate %roceedin/s, and filed 'ith the court a %etition in 'hich he a0erred the
e5ecution of the document of (ctober, 1+03, by the deceased, the failure of her co8
obli/or 9ayandante, to %ay any %art of the debt, e5ce%t P100 recei0ed from him in
2arch, 1+1@, and the com%lete insol0ency of 9ayandante. C%on these facts )aucian
%rayed the court for an order directin/ the administrator of the <o/ero estate to %ay
him the sum due.
" co%y of this %etition 'as ser0ed u%on !uerol 'ho o%%osed the /rantin/ of the
%etition u%on the /rounds that the claim had ne0er been %resented to the committee
on claims for allo'ance.
he court held that no contin/ent claim 'as filed before the commissioners by <oman
)aucian, 'ho seems to ha0e rested content 'ith the action %endin/. Section ,@* et
se:. of the $ode of $i0il Procedure %ro0ides for the %resentation of contin/ent claims,
a/ainst the estate. his claim is a contin/ent claim, because, accordin/ to the
decision of the Su%reme $ourt, =ermene/ilda <o/ero 'as a surety of Lino
9ayandante. he ob1ect of %resentin/ the claim to the commissioners is sim%ly to
allo' them to %ass on the claim and to /i0e the administrator an o%%ortunity to defend
the estate a/ainst the claim. his ha0in/ been /i0en by the administrator defendin/
the suit in the Su%reme $ourt, the court considers this a substantial com%liance 'ith
the la', and the said defense ha0in/ been made by the administrator, he cannot no'
come into court and hide behind a technicality and say that the claim had not been
%resented to the commissioners and that, the commissioners ha0in/ lon/ since made
re%ort, the claim cannot be referred to the commissioners and therefore the claim of
<oman )aucian is barred. he court considers that %ara/ra%h (e) of the o%%osition is
'ell8taAen and that there must be le/al action taAen a/ainst Lino 9ayandante to
determine 'hether or not he is insol0ent, and that declaration under oath to the effect
that he has no %ro%erty e5ce%t P100 'orth of %ro%erty, 'hich he has ceded to <oman
)aucian, is not sufficient.
(n (ctober 23, 1+1@, counsel for )aucian filed another %etition in the %roceedin/s
u%on the estate of =ermene/ilda <o/ero, in 'hich they a0erred, u%on the /rounds
last stated, that 9ayandante 'as insol0ent, and rene'ed the %rayer of the ori/inal
%etition. -t 'as contended that the court, by its order of "%ril 17, 1+1@, had 6admitted
the claim.6
he %etition 'as a/ain o%%osed by the administrator, and the 1ud/e, after hearin/,
refused to /rant )aucianDs %etition.
-n this court the a%%ellant contends that the trial 1ud/e erred (a) in refusin/ to /i0e
effect to the order dated "%ril 17, 1+1@I and (b) in refusin/ to order the administrator of
the estate of <o/ero to %ay the a%%ellant the amount demanded by him. he
contention 'ith re/ard to the order of "%ril 17, 1+1@, is that no a%%eal from it ha0in/
been taAen, it became final.
"n e5amination of the order in :uestion, ho'e0er, leads us to conclude that it 'as not
a final order, and therefore it 'as not a%%ealable. -n effect, it held that 'hate0er ri/hts
)aucian mi/ht ha0e a/ainst the estate of <o/ero 'ere sub1ect to the %erformance of a
condition %recedent, namely, that he should first e5haust this remedy a/ainst
9ayandante. he court re/arded 9ayandante. he court re/arded 9ayandante as the
%rinci%al debtor, and the deceased as a surety only liable for such deficiency as mi/ht
result after the e5haustion of the assets of the %rinci%al co8obli/or. he %i0otal fact
u%on 'hich the order 'as based 'as the failure of a%%ellant to sho' that he had
e5hausted his remedy a/ainst 9ayandante, and this failure the court re/arded as a
com%lete bar to the /rantin/ of the %etition at that time. he court made no order
re:uirin/ the a%%ellee to maAe any %ayment 'hate0er, and that %art of the o%inion,
u%on 'hich the order 'as based, 'hich contained statements of 'hat the court
intended to do 'hen the %etition should be rene'ed, 'as not bindin/ u%on him or any
other 1ud/e by 'hom he mi/ht be succeeded. <e/ardless of 'hat may be our 0ie's
'ith res%ect to the 1urisdiction of the court to ha0e /ranted the relief demanded by
a%%ellant in any e0ent, it is :uite clear from 'hat 'e ha0e stated that the order of "%ril
17, 1+1@, re:uired no action by the administrator at that time, 'as not final, and
therefore 'as not a%%ealable. ;e therefore conclude that no ri/hts 'ere conferred by
the said order of "%ril 17, 1+1@, and that it did not %reclude the administrator from
maAin/ o%%osition to the %etition of the a%%ellant 'hen it 'as rene'ed.
"%%ellant contends that his claim a/ainst the deceased 'as contin/ent. =is theory is
that the deceased 'as merely a surety of 9ayandante. =is ar/ument is that as section
,@* of the $ode of $i0il Procedure %ro0ides that contin/ent claims 6may be %resented
'ith the %roof to the committee,6 it follo's that such %resentation is o%tional.
"%%ellant, furthermore, contends that if a creditor holdin/ a contin/ent claim does not
see fit to a0ail himself of the %ri0ile/e thus %ro0ided, there is nothin/ in the la' 'hich
says that his claim is barred or %rescribed, and that such creditor, under section ,@3
of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, at any time 'ithin t'o years from the time allo'ed
other creditors to %resent their claims, may, if his claim becomes absolute 'ithin that
%eriod %resent it to the court for allo'ance. (n the other hand counsel for a%%ellee
contends (1) that contin/ent claims liAe absolute claims are barred for non8
%resentation to the committee but (2) that the claim in :uestion 'as in reality an
absolute claim and therefore indis%utably barred.
(&L)' &rom 'hat has been said it is clear that <o/ero, and her estate after her
death, 'as liable absolutely for the 'hole obli/ation, under section *+3 of the $ode of
$i0il ProcedureI and if the claim had been duly %resented to the committee for
allo'ance it should ha0e been allo'ed, 1ust as if the contact had been 'ith her alone.
(the case itself made a lon/ discussion on the difference bet'een 1oint liability and
solidary liability, and they concluded from the e0idence that <o/ero 'as solidarily
liable for the claim)
-t is thus a%%arent that by the e5%ress and incontro0ertible %ro0isions both of the $i0il
$ode and the $ode of $i0il Procedure, this claim 'as an absolute claim. "%%lyin/
section *+5 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, this court has fre:uently decided that such
claims are barred if not %resented to the committee in time and 'e are of the o%inion
that, for this reason, the claim 'as %ro%erly re1ected.
here is no force, in our 1ud/ment, in the contention that the %endency of the suit
instituted by the deceased for the cancellation of the document in 'hich the obli/ation
in :uestion 'as recorded 'as a bar to the %resentation of the claim a/ainst the estate.
he fact that the lo'er court had declared the document 0oid 'as not conclusi0e, as
its 1ud/ment 'as not final, and e0en assumin/ that if the claim had been %resented to
the committee for allo'ance, it 'ould ha0e been re1ected and that the decision of the
committee 'ould ha0e been sustained by the $ourt of &irst -nstance, the ri/hts of the
creditor could ha0e been %rotected by an a%%eal from that decision.
$n re,ar*s to ru-e 88, 4-# 2"L$(L2 and &-S=B<, ))., concurrin/J
he concurrin/ 1ustices 'ere of the o%inion that section ,@3 and ,@+ must be
construed as bein/ limited by the t'o %recedin/ sections, and hold that only such
contin/ent claims as ha0e been %resented to the committee may be reco0ered from
the estate or the distributees. -f no such contin/ent claims are %resented to the
committee they 'ill be non8e5istent so far as the distributees are concerned. -f such
claims are %ro0ed, but do not become absolute 'ithin the t'o years, the distributees
'ill Ano' that their res%ecti0e shares are sub1ect to a contin/ent liability, definite in
amount, and may /o0ern themsel0es accordin/ly.
hey 'ere also of the o%inion that the contention of the a%%ellant cannot be
sustained. Sections ,@3 and ,@+, in s%eaAin/ of contin/ent claims 'hich are
demandable after they become absolute, a/ainst the administration or a/ainst the
distributees, use the Ye5%ression 6such contin/ent claim.6 he use of the 'ord 6such6
is, 'e thinA, clearly intended to limit the 'ords 6contin/ent claim6 to the class referred
to in the t'o %roceedin/ sections X that is, to such contin/ent claims as ha0e been
%resented to the committee and re%orted to the court %ursuant to the re:uirements of
sections ,@* and ,@,.
;ith res%ect to the contention that the bar established by section *+5 is limited to
claims 6%ro%er to be allo'ed by the committee6 our re%ly is that contin/ent claims fall
'ithin this definition e:ually 'ith absolute claims. -t is true that as lon/ as they are
contin/ent the committee is not re:uired to %ass u%on them finally, but merely to
re%ort them so that the court may maAe %ro0ision for their %ayment by directin/ the
retention of assets. #ut if they become absolute after they ha0e been so %resented,
unless admitted by the administrator or e5ecutor, they are to be %ro0ed before the
committee, 1ust as are other claims. ;e are of the o%inion that the Ye5%ression
6%ro%er to be allo'ed by the $ommittee,6 1ust as are other claims. ;e are of the
o%inion that the Ye5%ression 6%ro%er to be allo'ed by the $ommittee,6 as limitin/ the
'ord 6claims6 in section *+5 is not intended to distin/uish absolute claims from
contin/ent claims, but to distin/uish those 'hich may in no e0ent be %assed u%on the
committee, because e5cluded by section ,07, from those o0er 'hich it has
1urisdiction.
3.R. 5o. L-28046 :ay 16, 1983
.($L$..$5& 5"1$45"L 8"5E vs. $5)&.&5)&51 .L"51&RS "SS4!$"1$45
9"!1S' his is an a%%eal by P.# from the (rder of $&- of 2anila dismissin/ P.#'s
com%laint a/ainst se0eral solidary debtors for the collection of a sum of money on the
/round that one of the defendants ($eferino Kalencia) died durin/ the %endency of the
case (i.e., after the %laintiff had %resented its e0idence) and therefore the com%laint,
bein/ a money claim based on contract, should be %rosecuted in the testate or
intestate %roceedin/ for the settlement of the estate of the deceased defendant
%ursuant to Section * of <ule 3*.
$SS%&' ;hether in an action for collection of a sum of money based on contract
a/ainst all the solidary debtors, the death of one defendant de%ri0es the court of
1urisdiction to %roceed 'ith the case a/ainst the sur0i0in/ defendants.
(&L)' -t is no' settled that the :uoted "rticle 121* /rants the creditor the substanti0e
ri/ht to seeA satisfaction of his credit from one, some or all of his solidary debtors, as
he deems fit or con0enient for the %rotection of his interestsI and if, after institutin/ a
collection suit based on contract a/ainst some or all of them and, durin/ its %endency,
one of the defendants dies, the court retains 1urisdiction to continue the %roceedin/s
and decide the case in res%ect of the sur0i0in/ defendants.
$onstruin/ Section *+3 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure from 'hence the afore:uoted
%ro0ision (Sec. *, <ule 3*) 'as taAen, this $ourt held that 'here t'o %ersons are
bound in solidum for the same debt and one of them dies, the 'hole indebtedness
can be %ro0ed a/ainst the estate of the latter, the decedent's liability bein/ absolute
and %rimaryI and if the claim is not %resented 'ithin the time %ro0ided by the rules, the
same 'ill be barred as a/ainst the estate. -t is e0ident from the fore/oin/ that Section
* of <ule 3, (no' <ule 3*) %ro0ides the %rocedure should the creditor desire to /o
a/ainst the deceased debtor, but there is certainly nothin/ in the said %ro0ision
maAin/ com%liance 'ith such %rocedure a condition %recedent before an ordinary
action a/ainst the sur0i0in/ solidary debtors, should the creditor choose to demand
%ayment from the latter, could be entertained to the e5tent that failure to obser0e the
same 'ould de%ri0e the court 1urisdiction to taAe co/nizance of the action a/ainst the
sur0i0in/ debtors. C%on the other hand, the $i0il $ode e5%ressly allo's the creditor to
%roceed a/ainst any one of the solidary debtors or some or all of them simultaneously.
here is, therefore, nothin/ im%ro%er in the creditor's filin/ of an action a/ainst the
sur0i0in/ solidary debtors alone, instead of institutin/ a %roceedin/ for the settlement
of the estate of the deceased debtor 'herein his claim could be filed.
-t is crystal clear that "rticle 121* of the .e' $i0il $ode is the a%%licable %ro0ision in
this matter. Said %ro0ision /i0es the creditor the ri/ht to '%roceed a/ainst anyone of
the solidary debtors or some or all of them simultaneously.' he choice is undoubtedly
left to the solidary, creditor to determine a/ainst 'hom he 'ill enforce collection. -n
case of the death of one of the solidary debtors, he (the creditor) may, if he so
chooses, %roceed a/ainst the sur0i0in/ solidary debtors 'ithout necessity of filin/ a
claim in the estate of the deceased debtors. -t is not mandatory for him to ha0e the
case dismissed a/ainst the sur0i0in/ debtors and file its claim in the estate of the
deceased solidary debtor.
3.R. 5o. L-8246 40tober , 1913
14:"S" R. 4S4R$4 vs. "53&L" S"5 "3%S1$5
9"!1S' his is an action brou/ht by the %laintiff a/ainst the defendants for the
foreclosure of a mort/a/e. "ntonio (sorio died on the 17th day of 2ay, 1+03, and
#enito San "/ustin died on the 1st day of .o0ember, 1+03.
he com%laint alle/es that on the 23th day of &ebruary, 13+1, #enito San "/ustin
e5ecuted and deli0ered to "ntonio (sorio a mort/a/e u%on a %ro%erty, for the %ur%ose
of securin/ the %ayment of the sum of P300. he mort/a/e contained a %ro0ision that
the debtor should %ay to the creditor the sum of P150 in case of a default in the
com%liance 'ith the conditions of said mort/a/e. he %laintiff %rayed for a 1ud/ment
on said mort/a/e, 'ith interest at , %er cent, from the 23th day of &ebruary, 13+1,
to/ether 'ith the sum of P150 to co0er the e5%enses incurred by the %laintiff by
reason of the fact that the defendants had failed to com%ly 'ith the conditions of said
mort/a/e.
(n the 3th day of 2arch, 1+11, the defendant $risanta =ernandez, 'ido' of the said
#enito San "/ustin, %resented a %etition asAin/ for %ermission to inter0ene in said
cause, for the %ur%ose of defendin/ the estate of her deceased husband.
(n the 12th day of Se%tember, 1+11, the said $risanta =ernandez ans'ered the
com%laint %resented by the %laintiff. he said defendant, $risanta =ernandez, in her
ans'er, filed a /eneral and s%ecial denial in the lo'er court and alle/ed that said
action had %rescribedI that t/ere ?as anot/er a0t+on 2en*+n, <or t/e sa;e
2ur2ose bet?een t/e sa;e 2art+es and that the court had no 1urisdiction o0er the
%erson of the said defendant.
he court ruled amon/ other thin/s, that another case is %endin/ bet'een the same
%arties for the same sum claimed herein, because the 1ud/ment rendered in case .o.
*07 is %endin/ on a%%eal before the Su%reme $ourt, an a%%eal raised by the same
counsel for the administratri5 of the deceased "ntonio (sorio. herefore, the court
absol0ed the defendants from this com%laint, 'ith costs a/ainst the %laintiff.
$SS%&' ;hether or not the court erred in declarin/ that another case is %endin/ in this
matter bet'een the same %arties.
(&L)' he record sho'ed that the %laintiff %resented the claim contained in said
mort/a/e, constitutin/ the basis of the com%laint in the %resent action, before the
commissioners a%%ointed by the court for the %ur%ose of considerin/ claims a/ainst
the estate of the said #enito San "/ustin. he said commissioners disallo'ed the
same. he %laintiff a%%ealed to the $&-. (n the 2,th day of "u/ust, 1+10, the %laintiff,
in furtherance of said a%%eal, %resented a com%laint in the $ourt of &irst -nstance, in
'hich he alle/ed the e5ecution and deli0ery of the mort/a/e described in the %resent
cause, the fact that said claim had been %resented to the said commissioners and had
been disallo'ed, and %rayed that the $ourt of &irst -nstance render a 1ud/ment in
fa0or of the estate of the said "ntonio (sorio and a/ainst the estate of said #enito
San "/ustin for the amount due on said mort/a/e. "fter hearin/ the e0idence in that
cause (.o. *07) the =onorable Kicente )ocson, 1ud/e, on the 10th day of 2arch,
1+11, reached the follo'in/ conclusionJ 6he court absol0es $risanta =ernandez from
the com%laint and declares %rescribed the action or credit herein claimed by the
estate of "ntonio (sorio from the estate of #enito San "/ustin, sentencin/ the %laintiff
to %ayment of the costs occasioned to $risanta =ernandez.6
&rom that 1ud/ment (cause .o. *07, $ourt of &irst -nstance) the %laintiffs /a0e notice
of their intention to a%%eal.
&rom the fore/oin/ it is clearly seen that the %ur%ose of the %resent action (.o. *07,
$ourt of &irst -nstance) had for its ob1ect e5actly the same %ur%ose for 'hich said
action .o. *07 'as brou/ht. -n other 'ords, the t'o actions 'ere for the %ur%ose of
securin/ a 1ud/ment u%on e5actly the same indebtedness. he a%%ellant contends
that she had a ri/ht to maintain the t'o actions by 0irtue of the %ro0isions of section
,03 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, 'hich %ro0idesJ
" creditor holdin/ a claim a/ainst the deceased, secured by mort/a/e or other
collateral security, may abandon the security and %rosecute his claim before the
committee, and share in the /eneral distribution of the assets of the estateI or he may
foreclose his mort/a/e or realize u%on his security, by ordinary action in court, maAin/
the e5ecutor or administrator a %arty defendantI . . . .
-t is clear by the %ro0isions of said :uoted section that a %erson holdin/ a mort/a/e
a/ainst the estate of a deceased %erson may abandon such security and %rosecute
his claim before the committee, and share in the distribution of the /eneral assets of
the estate. -t %ro0ides also that he may, at his o'n election, foreclose the mort/a/e
and realize u%on his security. #ut the la' does not %ro0ide that he may ha0e both
remedies. -f he elects one he must abandon the other. -f he falls in one he fails utterly.
=e is not %ermitted, under said section, to annoy those interested in the estates of
deceased %ersons by t'o actions for e5actly the same %ur%ose. " multi%licity of action
is abhorrent to the la' is not %ermitted in e:uity and 1ustice. -n 0ie' of the fact that the
%laintiff had elected to abandon the security /i0en by him mort/a/e and to %rosecute
his claim before the committee, he forfeited his ri/hts to brin/ an action u%on the
security in another se%arate and distinct action. ;ith this conclusion, the 1ud/ment of
the lo'er court must be affirmed, 'ith costs. So ordered.
!&R5" vs. !" 220 S!R" #1
&"$SJ
9el/ado and Le0iste entered into a loan a/reement 'hich 'as e0idenced by a
%romissory note. 9el/ado e5ecuted a chattel mort/a/e

o0er a ;illy's 1ee% o'ned by
him. "nd actin/ as the attorney8in8fact of herein %etitioner, $erna (%etitioner), he also
mort/a/ed a 6aunus6 car o'ned by the latter. he %eriod la%sed 'ithout 9el/ado
%ayin/ the loan. his %rom%ted Le0iste to file a collection suit. =erein %etitioner filed
his first 2otion to 9ismiss
.
he /rounds cited in the 2otion 'ere lacA of cause of
action a/ainst %etitioner and the death of 9el/ado. his 2otion to 9ismiss 'as
denied. Petitioner filed his second 2otion to 9ismiss on the /round that the trial court,
ac:uired no 1urisdiction o0er deceased defendant, that the claim did not sur0i0e, and
that there 'as no cause of action a/ainst him.
-SSCBJ
;(. the com%laint be dismissed for lacA of cause of action as a/ainst $erna 'ho
is not a debtor under the %romissory note8 considerin/ that accordin/ to settled
1uris%rudence the filin/ of a collection suit is deemed an abandonment of the security
of the chattel mort/a/e>
=BL9J
(nly 9el/ado si/ned the %romissory note and accordin/ly, he 'as the only one
bound by the contract of loan. .o'here did it a%%ear in the %romissory note that
%etitioner 'as a co8debtor. he S%ecial Po'er of "ttorney did not maAe %etitioner a
mort/a/or. "ll it did 'as to authorize 9el/ado to mort/a/e certain %ro%erties
belon/in/ to %etitioner. &rom the contract itself, it 'as clear that only 9el/ado 'as the
mort/a/or re/ardless of the fact that he used %ro%erties belon/in/ to a third %erson to
secure his debt. Le0iste, ha0in/ chosen to file the collection suit, could not no' run
after %etitioner for the satisfaction of the debt. his is e0en more true in this case
because of the death of the %rinci%al debtor, 9el/ado. Le0iste 'as %ursuin/ a money
claim a/ainst a deceased %erson. Section ,, <ule 3*. -t is clear by the %ro0isions of
said :uoted section that a %erson holdin/ a mort/a/e a/ainst the estate of a
deceased %erson may abandon such security and %rosecute his claim before the
committee, and share in the distribution of the /eneral assets of the estate. -t %ro0ides
also that he may, at his o'n election, foreclose the mort/a/e and realize u%on his
security. 3ut the law does not provide that he may have both remedies" /f he elects
one he must abandon the other. -f he fails in one he fails utterly.
8$!4L S"7$53S vs. !" 11 S!R" 630
&"$SJ
)uan de )esus 'as the o'ner of a %arcel of land. =e e5ecuted a S%ecial Po'er of
"ttorney in fa0or of his son, )ose de )esus. )ose obtained a loan from %etitioner banA.
o secure %ayment, )ose de )esus e5ecuted a deed of mort/a/e on the real %ro%erty
referred to in the S%ecial Po'er of "ttorney. #y reason of his failure to %ay the loan
obli/ation e0en durin/ his lifetime, %etitioner banA caused the mort/a/e to be
e5tra1udicially foreclosed. Pri0ate res%ondents herein filed a $om%laint for the
annulment of the foreclosure sale or for the re%urchase by them of the %ro%erty. rial
$ourt 'as re0ersed by res%ondent $ourt of "%%eals and stated that since the s%ecial
%o'er to mort/a/e /ranted to )ose de )esus did not include the %o'er to sell, it 'as
error for the lo'er $ourt not to ha0e declared the foreclosure %roceedin/s 8and
auction sale held in 1+,3 null and 0oid because the S%ecial Po'er of "ttorney /i0en
by )uan de )esus to )ose de )esus 'as merely to mort/a/e his %ro%erty, and not to
e5tra1udicially foreclose the mort/a/e and sell the mort/a/ed %ro%erty in the said
e5tra1udicial foreclosure.
-SSCBJ
;hether or not the a/ent8son e5ceeded the sco%e of his authority in a/reein/ to a
sti%ulation in the mort/a/e deed that %etitioner banA could e5tra1udicially foreclose the
mort/a/ed %ro%erty.
=BL9J
he sti%ulation /rantin/ an authority to e5tra1udicially foreclose a mort/a/e is an
ancillary sti%ulation su%%orted by the same cause or consideration for the mort/a/e
and forms an essential or inse%arable %art of that bilateral a/reement. he %o'er to
foreclose is not an ordinary a/ency that contem%lates e5clusi0ely the re%resentation
of the %rinci%al by the a/ent but is %rimarily an authority conferred u%on the
mort/a/ee for the latter's o'n %rotection. hat %o'er sur0i0es the death of the
mort/a/or. hat ri/ht e5isted inde%endently of said sti%ulation and is clearly
reco/nized in Section ,, <ule 3* of the <ules of $ourt, 'hich /rants to a mort/a/ee
three remedies that can be alternati0ely %ursued in case the mort/a/or dies, to 'itJ (1)
to 'ai0e the mort/a/e and claim the entire debt from the estate of the mort/a/or as
an ordinary claimI (2) to foreclose the mort/a/e 1udicially and %ro0e any deficiency as
an ordinary claimI and (7) to rely on the mort/a/e e5clusi0ely, foreclosin/ the same at
any time before it is barred by %rescri%tion, 'ithout ri/ht to file a claim for any
deficiency. he sti%ulation in that re/ard, althou/h ancillary, forms an essential %art of
the mort/a/e contract and is inse%arable therefrom. .o creditor 'ill a/ree to enter
into a mort/a/e contract 'ithout that sti%ulation intended for its %rotection. Petitioner
banA, therefore, in effectin/ the e5tra1udicial foreclosure of the mort/a/ed %ro%erty,
merely a0ailed of a ri/ht conferred by la'.
)& >"!48 vs. !" 184 S!R" 294
&"$SJ
9r. "lfredo B. )acob 'as the re/istered o'ner of a %arcel of land. $entenera 'as
a%%ointed as administrator of =acienda )acob. #ecause of the %roblem of %ayin/
realty ta5es, internal re0enue ta5es and un%aid 'a/es of farm laborers of the
hacienda, 9r. )acob asAed $entenera to ne/otiate for a loan. $onse:uently,
$entenera secured a loan from the #icol Sa0in/s. $entenera si/ned and e5ecuted the
real estate mort/a/e and %romissory note as attorney8in8fact of 9r. )acob.

$entenera
failed to %ay the same but 'as able to arran/e a restructurin/ of the loan usin/ the
same s%ecial %o'er of attorney and %ro%erty as security. "/ain, $entenera failed to
%ay the loan 'hen it fell due and so he arran/ed for another restructurin/ of the
loan. ;hen the loan 'as t'ice re8structured, the %roceeds of the same 'ere not
actually /i0en by the banA to $entenera since the transaction 'as actually nothin/ but
a rene'al of the first or ori/inal loan and the su%%osed %roceeds 'ere a%%lied as
%ayment for the loan. $entenera a/ain failed to %ay the loan u%on the maturity date
forcin/ the banA to send a demand letter.

he banA foreclosed the real estate
mort/a/e. omasa Kda. de )acob 'ho 'as subse:uently named administratri5 of the
estate of 9r. )acob and 'ho claimed to be an heir of the latter, conducted her o'n
in0esti/ation and therefore she filed a com%laint alle/in/ that the s%ecial %o'er of
attorney and the documents therein indicated are for/ed and therefore the loan and4or
real estate mort/a/es and %romissory notes are null and 0oid.
-SSCBJ
;hether or not an e5tra1udicial foreclosure of a mort/a/e may %roceed e0en after
the death of the mort/a/or>
=BL9J
&rom the fore/oin/ %ro0ision of the <ules of court it is clearly reco/nized that a
mort/a/ee has three remedies that may be alternately a0ailed of in case the
mort/a/or dies, to 'itJ (1) to 'ai0e the mort/a/e and claim the entire debt from the
estate of the mort/a/or as an ordinary claimI (2) to foreclose the mort/a/e 1udicially
and %ro0e the deficiency as an ordinary claimI andI (7) to rely on the mort/a/e
e5clusi0ely, or other security and foreclose the same at anytime, before it is barred by
%rescri%tion, 'ithout the ri/ht to file a claim for any deficiency. &rom the fore/oin/ it is
clear that the mort/a/ee does not lose its li/ht to e5tra1udicially foreclose the
mort/a/e e0en after the death of the mort/a/or as a third alternati0e under Section ,,
<ule 3* of the <ules of $ourt. he %o'er to foreclose a mort/a/e is not an ordinary
a/ency that contem%lated e5clusi0ely the re%resentation of the %rinci%al by the a/ent
but is %rimarily an authority conferred u%on the mort/a/ee for the latter's o'n
%rotection. hat %o'er sur0i0es the death of the mort/a/or. he ri/ht of the
mort/a/ee banA to e5tra1udicially foreclose the mort/a/e after the death of the
mort/a/or, actin/ throu/h his attorney8in8fact, did not de%end on the authority in the
deed of mort/a/e e5ecuted by the latter. hat ri/ht e5isted inde%endently of said
sti%ulation and is clearly reco/nized in Section ,, <ule 3* of the <ules of $ourt
aforecited.
:"3L"3%& vs. .)8 30 S!R" 1#6
&"$SJ
S%ouses B/midio 2a/la:ue and Sabina Paya'al 'ere the o'ners of a %arcel of
land. hey obtained a loan of t'o thousand %esos from the #ulacan 9e0elo%ment
#anA

e0idenced by a %romissory note. o secure the loan, the s%ouses e5ecuted a
deed of real estate mort/a/e on the abo0e8described %arcel of land, includin/ its
im%ro0ements. Sabina Paya'al died. (n 9ecember 22, 1+,,, B/midio 2a/la:ue %aid
Planters 9e0elo%ment #anA the amount of P2,000.00, 'hich the banA acce%ted. (n
"%ril +, 1+,+, B/midio 2a/la:ue died. (n Se%tember 15, 1+,3, for non8%ayment in
full of the loan, the banA e5tra81udicially foreclosed on the real estate mort/a/e. 9a0id
2a/la:ue, as heir of the deceased s%ouses filed a com%laint for annulment of the
sale, recon0eyance of title, 'ith dama/es, and in1unction. (n Se%tember 2@, 1+30,
the banA sold the %ro%erty to the s%ouses "n/el S. #eltran and Brlinda $. #eltran.
rial court rendered decision dismissin/ the com%laint for lacA of merit or insufficiency
of e0idence. $ourt of "%%eals rendered decision affirmin/ the a%%ealed decision in
toto.
-SSCBJ
;(. =onorable $ourt of "%%eals erred in not findin/ that the #anA should ha0e
filed its claim in the settlement of estate of the deceased mort/a/ors.
=BL9J
he rule is that a secured creditor holdin/ a real estate mort/a/e has three (7)
o%tions in case of death of the debtor. hese areJ (l) to 'ai0e the mort/a/e and claim
the entire debt from the estate of the mort/a/or as an ordinary claimI (2) to foreclose
the mort/a/e 1udicially and %ro0e any deficiency as an ordinary claimI and (7) to rely
on the mort/a/e e5clusi0ely, foreclosin/ the same at anytime before it is barred by
%rescri%tion, 'ithout ri/ht to file a claim for any deficiency. (b0iously, res%ondent banA
a0ailed itself of the third o%tion.
.58 vs. !" 360 S!R" 30
&"$SJ
he s%ouses $hua 'ere the o'ners of a %arcel of land. C%on "ntonioDs death, the
%robate court a%%ointed his son, %ri0ate res%ondent "llan 2. $hua, s%ecial
administrator of "ntonioDs intestate estate. he court also authorized "llan to obtain a
loan from %etitioner Phili%%ine .ational #anA to be secured by a real estate mort/a/e
o0er the abo0e8mentioned %arcel of land. &or failure to %ay the loan in full, the banA
e5tra1udicially foreclosed the real estate mort/a/e. o claim a deficiency, P.#
instituted an action a/ainst both 2rs. "suncion 2. $hua and "llan $hua in his
ca%acity as s%ecial administrator of his fatherDs intestate estate. he trial court
declared them in default and recei0ed e0idence ex parte. he <$ rendered its
decision, orderin/ the dismissal of P.#Ds com%laint. (n a%%eal, the $ourt of "%%eals
affirmed the <$ decision by dismissin/ P.#Ds a%%eal for lacA of merit.
-SSCBJ
;(. the $" erred in holdin/ that P.# can n lon/er %ursue its deficiency claim
a/ainst the estate of the deceased ha0in/ elected one of its alternati0e ri/ht %ursuant
to Sec. , <ule 3* of the <($ des%ite a s%ecial enactment co0erin/ e5tra1udicial
foreclosure sale allo'in/ recourse for a deficiency claim as su%%orted by
contem%orary 1uris%rudence>
=BL9J
-n the %resent case, it is undis%uted that the conditions under the aforecited rule
ha0e been com%lied 'ith. -t follo's that 'e must consider Sec. , of <ule 3*,
a%%ro%riately a%%licable to the contro0ersy at hand. $ase la' no' holds that this rule
/rants to the mort/a/ee three distinct, inde%endent and mutually e5clusi0e remedies
that can be alternati0ely %ursued by the mort/a/e creditor for the satisfaction of his
credit in case the mort/a/or dies, amon/ themJ (1) to 'ai0e the mort/a/e and claim
the entire debt from the estate of the mort/a/or as an ordinary claimI (2) to foreclose
the mort/a/e 1udicially and %ro0e any deficiency as an ordinary claimI and (7) to rely
on the mort/a/e e5clusi0ely, foreclosin/ the same at any time before it is barred by
%rescri%tion without right to file a claim for any deficiency.

he %lain result of ado%tin/
the last mode of foreclosure is that the creditor 'ai0es his ri/ht to reco0er any
deficiency from the estate. &ollo'in/ the 4ere% rulin/ that the third mode includes
e5tra1udicial foreclosure sales, the result of e5tra1udicial foreclosure is that the creditor
'ai0es any further deficiency claim. $learly, in our 0ie', %etitioner herein has chosen
the mort/a/e8creditorDs o%tion of e5tra1udicially foreclosin/ the mort/a/ed %ro%erty of
the $huas. his choice no' bars any subse:uent deficiency claim a/ainst the estate
of the deceased, "ntonio 2. $hua. Petitioner may no lon/er a0ail of the com%laint for
the reco0ery of the balance of indebtedness a/ainst said estate, after %etitioner
foreclosed the %ro%erty securin/ the mort/a/e in its fa0or. -t follo's that in this case
no further liability remains on the %art of res%ondents and the late "ntonio 2. $huaDs
estate.
R%L& 86, S&!1$45 8-9
(1) R":4S vs. 8$)$5
161 S!R" #61 (1988)
9"!1S'
"ttorney &ernandez , counsel for the administratri5 <osaura )aldon 'hose ser0ices
has already been terminated, filed a claim for attorney's fees in the 1udicial settlement
of the estate of &eli5berto 9. )aldon. he subse:uent counsel for the administratri5,
"tty. <amos also filed a claim for attorneyDs fees. he lo'er court a'arded P50,000
and P25,000 to "tty. &ernandez and "tty. <amos, res%ecti0ely. he latter mo0ed for
reconsideration. )ud/e #idin increased his a'ard of attorneyDs fees to P@0,000.
"dministratri5 <osaura P. )aldon filed a Petition for $ertiorari ur/in/ that res%ondent
court acted 'ithout or in e5cess of his 1urisdiction or 'ith /ra0e abuse of discretion in
issuin/ the order a'ardin/ attorney's fees to Kir/inia <amos, 'ithout the latter filin/ a
formal claim under Section + of <ule 3* of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt and that she
and the estate had been denied due %rocess since her counsel, Kir/inia <amos, had
not notified nor ser0ed her 'ith co%ies of her %leadin/s and the assailed orders of
res%ondent court.
$SS%&' ;4. the res%ondent court erred in a'ardin/ the attorneyDs fees to "tty. <amos
(&L)' ?es.
he %etitioner <osaura )aldon had not been ser0ed 'ith a co%y of Kir/inia <amos'
2otion for <econsideration. he records too, clearly sho' that <osaura )aldon 'as
not furnished 'ith a co%y of the %etition of Kir/inia <amos here, and that only
<osemarie )aldon (ado%ted dau/hter of the administratri5 and decedent) had been
a'are of Kir/inia <amos' claim for %rofessional fees.
-n estate settlement %roceedin/s, it is of course im%erati0e that the administrator be
notified of any claim that is in fact asserted a/ainst the estate so as to afford him
e0ery o%%ortunity to dis%ute that claim. his notice re:uirement is basically an
im%lication of the due %rocess. $learly, in the instant %etition, the administratri5 'as
de%ri0ed of her day in court. She 'as not afforded any o%%ortunity to o%%osin/
Kir/inia <amos' claim, 'hich she could ha0e dis%uted had she been a'are of it.
-t may be noted that no formal claim had been filed by %etitioner <amos a/ainst
the estate for her %rofessional fees. -nitially, her claim 'as brou/ht to the res%ondent
$ourt's attention throu/h a 0erbal manifestation in o%en court 'here she alle/ed that
a 'ritten contract for ser0ices had been entered into bet'een her and the
administratri5. " creditor has t'o remedies8 (1) =e can %rosecute an action a/ainst
the administrator as an indi0idual. -f 1ud/ment is rendered a/ainst the administrator
and it is %aid by him, 'hen he %resents his final account to the $ourt of &irst -nstance
as such administrator he can include the amount so %aid as an e5%ense of
administration and (2) the creditor can also %resent a %etition in the %roceedin/
relatin/ to the settlement of the estate, asAin/ that the court, after notice to all %ersons
interested, allo' his claim and direct the administrator to %ay it as an e5%ense of
administration.
"tty. <amos failed to resort to either %rocedure in %ressin/ for her attorney's fees
before the res%ondent $ourt. ;e find that the res%ondent $ourt e5ceeded its
1urisdiction in a'ardin/ %etitioner <amos %rofessional fees 'ithout either a formal
claim therefore in the estate %roceedin/s or a claim a/ainst the administratri5 for
'hich the latter sou/ht to reimburse herself as an allo'able e5%ense of
administration.
3456"L&S-4R&5S& 7S. !"
163 S!R" 4 (1988)
9"!1S'
Prima "lba retained "tty. Fonzales to re%resent her in the %robate %f her husbandDs
'ill. he %etitioner claimed the sti%ulated attorney's fees e:ui0alent to 10T of the
estate but the %robate court in its order allo'ed him only P20,000.00 on the basis of
!uantum meruit" Petitioner then filed a notice of a%%eal from this order, and the
%robate court then transmitted the records of the case to the $ourt of "%%eals.
=o'e0er, the $ourt of "%%eals declared the %etitioner's a%%eal abandoned and
dismissed for his failure to submit his record on a%%eal as re:uired under #P 12+ and
the -nterim <ules and Fuidelines. he %etitioner then came on a%%eal by certiorari to
the S$ to asA that the said resolution be set aside as null and 0oid.
$SS%&J '4n 'hen an a'ard of attorneyDs fees by the %robate court is ele0ated to the
$", a record of a%%eal is necessary
(&L)' ?es.
he %ertinent %ro0ision of #P 12+ reads as follo'sJ
Sec. 7+. -ppeals. X he %eriod for a%%eal from final orders, resolution, a'ards,
1ud/ment or decisions of any court in all cases shall be fifteen (15) days counted from
the notice of the final order, resolution a'ard, 1ud/ment or decision a%%ealed from.
Pro0ided, ho'e0er, that in habeas corpus cases the %eriod for a%%eal shall be forty8
ei/ht (@3) hours from the notice of the 1ud/ment a%%ealed from.
.o record on a%%eal shall be re:uired to taAe an a%%eal. -n lieu thereof, the entire
ori/inal record shall be transmitted 'ith all the %a/es %rominently numbered
consecuti0ely to/ether 'ith an inde5 of the contents thereof.
his section shall not a%%ly in a%%eals in s%ecial %roceedin/s and in other cases
'herein multi%le a%%eals are allo'ed under a%%licable %ro0isions of the <ules of
$ourt.
-t is settled that the fees of the la'yer re%resentin/ the e5ecutor or administrator are
directly char/eable a/ainst the client for 'hom the ser0ices ha0e been rendered and
not a/ainst the estate of the decedent. =o'e0er, the e5ecutor or administrator may
claim reimbursement of such fees from the estate if it can be sho'n that the ser0ices
of the la'yer redounded to its benefit.
"s the %etitioner's claim for attorney's fees is not a claim a/ainst the estate of the
%ri0ate res%ondent's husband, he could ha0e filed it in an ordinary ci0il action, in 'hich
e0ent an a%%eal therefrom 'ill not be re/arded as in0ol0ed in a s%ecial %roceedin/
re:uirin/ the submission of a record on a%%eal. -t a%%ears, ho'e0er, that it 'as not
filed in such se%arate ci0il action but in the %robate case itself, 'hich is a s%ecial
%roceedin/ and so should be deemed /o0erned by <ule 10+ on a%%eals from such
%roceedin/s. "ccordin/ly, record on a%%eal is re:uire.
=(;BKB<, it is noted that the :uestion %resented in this case is one of first
im%ression and that the %etitioner acted in honest if mistaAen, inter%retation of the
a%%licable la'. -n 0ie' of these circumstances, and in the interest of 1ustice, the $ourt
feels that the %etitioner should be /i0en an o%%ortunity to com%ly by submittin/ the
re:uired record on a%%eal as a condition for the re0i0al of the a%%eal.

)& >&S%S 7S. )"6"
1

43 4.3. 20## (1946)
9"!1S'
)ustina S. Kda de 2an/la%us %urchased from Si5to de )esus and .atalia "lfon/a,
co8heirs of the %etitioners, the ri/hts, interest, and %artici%ation of the said Si5to and
.atalia in the testate estate of Fa0ino de )esus, %articularly, the t'o %arcels of
land. hese %arcels of land 'ere assi/ned to Si5to and .atalia as their shares in the
same testate estate based on the %ro1ect of %artition duly a%%ro0ed by the %robate
court. he sale 'as also a%%ro0ed by the %robate court.
"fter learnin/ of the aforesaid sale, %etitioners instituted an action in the $&- of
#atan/as for le/al redem%tion a/ainst res%ondent Kda. de 2an/la%us. ;hile the
latter case is %endin/ a%%eal, Kda. de 2an/la%us in the estate of the deceased
Fa0ino de )esus asAed the $&- of #atan/as to order the %ro0incial sheriff of said
%ro0ince to taAe immediate %ossession of the %arcels of land in contro0ersy, 'hich
'as in the %ossession of the %etitioners, and to deli0er them to her after'ards. he
%etition 'as /ranted and deli0ery 'as subse:uently made by the sheriff.
$SS%&J '4n the res%ondent 1ud/e, %residin/ the %robate court, had 1urisdiction to
order the deli0ery of the %ossession of the aforesaid %arcels of land to
res%ondent Kda. de 2an/la%us 'ithin the same estate %roceedin/ and not in an
inde%endent ordinary action.
(&L)' ?BS (this case is based on the old rules of court).
&rom the admitted fact that the %robate court had already a%%ro0ed the %ro1ect of
%artition 'ithout any reser0ation as to %ayment of debts, funeral char/es, e5%enses of
administration, allo'ances to the 'ido', or inheritance ta5, it 'ould a%%ear that the
estate 'as ready for distribution, %ursuant to <ule +1, section 1 (no' <ule +0 section
1). .either %arty has made any re%resentation to the contrary in this case.
he 0ery fact that %etitioners lod/ed an action for le/al redem%tion 'ith the $ourt
of &irst -nstance of #atan/as by commencin/ a ci0il case carries 'ith it an im%lied but
necessary admission on the %art of said %etitioners that the sale to res%ondent Kda.
de 2an/la%us of the shares of Si5to and .atalia 'as 0alid. he sale 'as duly
a%%ro0ed by the %robate court. #y the effects of that sale and its a%%ro0al by the
%robate court the %urchaser ste%%ed into the shoes of the sellers for the %ur%oses of
the distribution of the estate, and <ule +1, section 1 (no' <ule +0 section 1), confers
u%on such %urchaser, amon/ other ri/hts, the ri/ht to demand and recover the share
%urchased by her not only from the e5ecutor or administrator, but also from any other
person ha0in/ the same in his %ossession.
-t is e0ident that the %robate court, ha0in/ the custody and control of the entire
estate, is the most lo/ical authority to effectuate this %ro0ision 'ithin the same estate
%roceedin/, said %roceedin/ bein/ the most con0enient one in 'hich this %o'er and
function of the court can be e5ercised and %erformed 'ithout the necessity of
re:uirin/ the %arties to under/o the incon0enience, delay and e5%ense of ha0in/ to
commence and liti/ate an entirely different action. here can be no :uestion that if the
e5ecutor or administrator has the %ossession of the share to be deli0ered the %robate
court 'ould ha0e 1urisdiction 'ithin the same estate %roceedin/ to order him to deli0er
that %ossession to the %erson entitled thereto, and 'e see no reason, le/al or
e:uitable, for denyin/ the same %o'er to the %robate court to be e5ercised 'ithin the
same estate %roceedin/ if the share to be deli0ered ha%%ens to be in the %ossession
of 6any other %erson,6 es%ecially 'hen 6such other %erson6 is one of the heirs
themsel0es 'ho are already under the 1urisdiction of the %robate court in the same
estate %roceedin/.
1
his case is also assi/ned under <ule +0 Section 187. here is no discussion
rele0ant to <ule 3+ section 38+. -f you 'ant to checA the ori/inal usin/ la'%hil, the
case 'as %romul/ated on "u/ust 71, 1+@*.
14RR&S 7S. &5!"R5"!$45
2

89 .($L 68 (19#1)
9"!1S'
$ommissioners a%%ointed by the court in the settlement of the intestate estate of
2arcelo de #or1a submitted a %ro1ect of %artition in 'hich the land in :uestion, 'hich
is and 'as then in the %ossession of the herein %etitioners, 'as included as %ro%erty
of the estate and assi/ned to one 2i/uel #. 9ayco, one of 2arcelo de #or1a's heirs.
(0er the ob1ection of the %etitioners, sur0i0in/ children of !uintin de #or1a 'ho 'as
one of 2arcelo's children, the %ro%osed %artition 'as a%%ro0ed and affirmed by the
S$ on a%%eal. Petitioners assert e5clusi0e o'nershi% o0er the land and :uestioned
the 1urisdiction of the %robate court to order deli0ery of the land.
$SS%&' '4n the res%ondent 1ud/e, %residin/ the %robate court, had 1urisdiction to
order the deli0ery of the %ossession of the land to the administrator 'ithin the same
estate %roceedin/ and not in an inde%endent ordinary action.
(&L)' ?es.
S$ held, :uotin/ 1e *esus vs" 1a%a, that the %robate court, ha0in/ the custody
and control of the entire estate, is the most lo/ical authority to effectuate this %ro0ision
'ithin the same estate %roceedin/, said %roceedin/ bein/ the most con0enient one in
'hich this %o'er and function of the court can be e5ercised and %erformed 'ithout the
necessity if re:uirin/ the %arties to under/o the incon0enience, delay and e5%ense of
ha0in/ to commence and liti/ate an entirely different action. here can be no :uestion
of the share to be deli0ered the %robate court 'ould ha0e 1urisdiction 'ithin the same
estate %roceedin/ to order him to deli0er that %ossession to the %erson entitled
thereto, and 'e see no reason, le/al or e:uitable, for denyin/ the same %o'er to the
%robate court to be e5ercised 'ithin the same estate %roceedin/ if the share to be
deli0ered ha%%ens to be in the %ossession of 'any other %erson,' es%ecially 'hen 'such
other %erson' is one of the heirs themsel0es 'ho are already under the 1urisdiction of
the %robate court in the same estate %roceedin/.
he %etitioners are also bound by the a%%ro0ed %artition by 0irtue of esto%%el. he
%artition here had not only been a%%ro0ed and thus become a 1ud/ment of the court,
but distribution of the %etitioners had recei0ed the %ro%erty assi/ned to them or their
father's estate. "nd this 'as not all. "s the administrator had refused, on technical
/rounds, to turn o0er to them their or their father's share, they mo0ed for and secured
from the %robate court an order for the e5ecution of the %artition unduly delayin/ the
closin/ of the estate. -n the face of 'hat they ha0e done, they are %recluded from
attacAin/ the 0alidity of the %artition or any %art of it. " %arty cannot be allo'ed to rea%
the fruits of a %artition, a/reement or 1ud/ment and re%udiate 'hat does not suit
him. he court had only the %artition to e5amine, to see if the :uestioned land 'as
included therein. he inclusion bein/ sho'n, and there bein/ no alle/ation that the
inclusion 'as effected throu/h im%ro%er means or 'ithout the %etitioners' Ano'led/e,
the %artition barred any further liti/ation on said title and o%erated to brin/ the %ro%erty
under the control and 1urisdiction of the court for %ro%er dis%osition accordin/ to the
tenor of the %artition.
2
his case is also assi/ned under <ule +0 Section 187. here is no discussion
rele0ant to <ule 3+ Section 38+.
"RR4C4 7S. 3&R45"
#4 .($L 909 (1930)
9"!1S'
-n the course of the intestate %roceedin/s of the estate of $once%cion Ferona,
-/nacio "rroyo filed an a%%lication alle/in/ that Kictor, )acoba, Patricia, $iriaca, and
$lara, surnamed Ferona, bein/ all of a/e, e5ecuted an a/reement of %artition and
ad1udication of the estate of $once%cion Ferona by 0irtue of 'hich they assi/ned to
the a%%licant all the estate of the late $once%cion Ferona, renouncin/ 'hate0er ri/hts
they had or mi/ht ha0e thereafter to said %ro%erty in fa0or of the a%%licant, in
consideration of other %ro%erty ceded to them by said a/reement. &or 'hich reason
-/nacio "rroyo %rayed the court to declare him to be the sole assi/nee or successor
and heir of the late $once%cion Ferona. he court /ranted the a%%lication but
subse:uently stayed the e5ecution %endin/ the consent of one 2aria Feronima.
hereafter, counsel for )acoba, $iriaca, $lara, and Patricia, surnamed Ferona,
%etitioned the court to annul the a/reement and thereby renderin/ nu/atory the order
of the court /rantin/ the a%%lication of -/nacio. he court held that it is not com%etent
to act on the %etition and such should be the sub1ect of a se%arate action.
$SS%&' $an the court that a%%ro0ed the a/reement of %artition dated annul said
a/reement and 0acate the order a%%ro0in/ it on the /round of fraud>
(&L)' ?BS.
he court 'hich %ossessed 1urisdiction to a%%ro0e said a/reement of %artition may
disa%%ro0e or annul it. "n a/reement of %artition made by heirs 'ho are all of a/e,
certainly binds all of them, es%ecially 'hen 1udicially a%%ro0ed. #ut this does not
mean that none of the %artici%ants may thereafter asA for the annulment or rescission
of the a/reement u%on disco0erin/ that fraud, deceit, mistaAe, or some other defect
has 0itiated the consent /i0en, %ro0ided the action is brou/ht 'ithin the statutory
%eriod. (f course, if the estate has %assed to the heirs by 0irtue of the a/reement of
%artition, there is nothin/ to administer and the intestate %roceedin/s must be deemed
terminated. #ut if the a/reement of %artition be successfully im%u/ned, if it be sho'n
that fraud 'as %racticed in the com%romise bet'een the %arties, then an administrator
may %ro%erly be a%%ointed to taAe char/e of the estate 'ith a 0ie' to its 1ust
distribution in accordance 'ith the la'.
"ll demands and claims filed by any heir, le/atee, or %arty in interest to a testate
or intestate succession, shall be acted u%on and decided in the same s%ecial
%roceedin/s, and not in a se%arate action, and the 1ud/e 'ho has 1urisdiction o0er the
administration of the inheritance, and 'ho, 'hen the time comes, 'ill be called u%on
to di0ide and ad1udicate it to the interested %arties, shall taAe co/nizance of all such
:uestions. he court that a%%ro0ed the %artition and the a/reement in ratification
thereof may annul both 'hene0er, as it is here alle/ed, the a%%ro0al 'as obtained by
deceit or fraud, and the %etition must be filed in the course of the intestate
%roceedin/s, for it is /enerally admitted that %robate courts are authorized to 0acate
any decree or 1ud/ment %rocured by fraud, not only 'hile he %roceedin/s in the
course of 'hich it 'as issued are %endin/, but e0en, as in this case, 'ithin a
reasonable time thereafter.
(R86, S8-9, H6 G R90, S1-3, H13)
&)%"R)" 8&5&)$!14 7. >%L$4 >"7&LL"5"
10 ./+-. 19 (1908)
+-.T5J 2a5imino )alandoni, brother of testator 2a5imo )alandoni, %etitioned that the
administrator, )ulio )a0ellana, be directed to %ay him P+35.
2a5imino alle/ed that accordin/ to the 'ill, half of hacienda 6Lantad6, situated in
Silay, .e/ros (ccidental, had been be:ueathed to him. he said /ift 'as sub1ect to
the %ayment of certain debts and e5%enses of the estate only 'ith res%ect to the
%roducts of the years 1+07 and 1+0@. 2a5imino a0ers that those had already been
%aid.
=alf of the said hacienda 'as sold and P+35, as %roceeds of the sale, remained in
)a0ellana to meet any la'ful claim.
2a5imino contends the %ortion inherited by the GheirsE &rancisco )alandoni and
Sofia )alandoni 'as more than enou/h to %ay the other debts and e5%enses of the
estate. ('in/ to 2a5iminoDs death, Bduarda #enedicto substituted him as a %arty.
)a0ellana a0erred thatJ a com%laint should ha0e been filed a/ainst the other
le/atees and not the administrator aloneI the )alandonis should not be considered as
heirs but as le/atees thus they are in the same %osition as 2a5iminoI and the
obli/ation to %ay all the debts 'as im%osed on the entire inheritance and not any
%articular %ro%erty nor on any determined %arty in interest named in the 'ill.
he lo'er court /ranted the motion filed by 2a5imino.
/5567J ;hether or not the motion should be dismissed.
8791J ?BS. 2a5imo )alandoni left no la'ful ascendants or descendants ha0in/ any
direct claim as hereditary successors. he testator has distributed all his %ro%erty in
le/acies.
$onsiderin/ that all those 'ho are benefited thereby ha0e not recei0ed from the
testator a uni0ersal succession to his estate they should be considered merely as
le/atees.
<es%ect for the 'ill of a testator constitutes the %rinci%al basis for the correct
inter%retation of all of the clauses of the 'illI the 'ords and %ro0isions therein 'ritten
must be %lainly construed in order to a0oid a 0iolation of his intentions and real
%ur%ose.
he testator im%osed on his estate the obli/ation to %ay his debts 'ith the
%roducts of the same, and has %rescribed the manner in 'hich such shall be done
until all obli/ations are e5tin/uished. "rticle 102, of the $i0il $ode states that the
administrator can not %ay the le/acies until all the creditors had been %aid.
Section ,23 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure %ro0ides that if the testator maAes
%ro0ision by his 'ill, or desi/nates the estate to be a%%ro%riated for the %ayment of his
debts they shall be %aid accordin/ to the %ro0isions of the 'ill. -f the %ro0ision is not
sufficient, such %art of the estate of the testator, as is not dis%osed of by 'ill, shall be
a%%ro%riated for that %ur%ose.
he debts and e5%enses of the estate must be %aid %ro rata by the le/atees in the
manner %ro0ided in the 'ill, or in accordance 'ith the $ode of $i0il Procedure.
"ny challen/e to the 0alidity of a 'ill must be acted u%on and decided 'ithin the
same s%ecial %roceedin/s not in a se%arate action and the same 1ud/e ha0in/
1urisdiction in the administration of the estate shall taAe co/nizance of the :uestion
raised, inasmuch as 'hen the day comes he 'ill be called u%on to maAe distribution
and ad1udication of the %ro%erty to the interested %arties.
(R86, S8-9, H)
"5145$4 Q%$R$54 7. (on. 3R4S.& G 34$53!4
169 S!R" 02 (1989)
:5. 075296T/2;" ;"3" The background facts < issues were not provided, even in
the original, since this was not a full&blown decision" Thus, the facts in the 0esolution
seem vague" ;onetheless, useful portions are included herein"$
&or resolution are the se%arate motions for reconsideration of the decision of the
Su%reme $ourtJ
)otion for 0econsideration of *uan +" =ome%.
$laims for attorney's fees (e:ui0alent to 12T of 147 of the estate of 9on "lfonso
$astell0i) and trans%ortation U re%resentation e5%enses may not be %ro%erly char/ed
a/ainst the estate. he claims did not inure to the benefit of 9on "lfonso or his estate.
he term 6claims6 is /enerally construed to mean debts or demands of a
%ecuniary nature 'hich could ha0e been enforced a/ainst the deceased in his lifetime
or liability contracted by the deceased before his death.
)otion for 0econsideration of *esus T" 1avid.
he claim for attorney's fees is for ser0ices rendered for the benefit of 9oSa
$armen $astell0i, and not for the benefit of 9on "lfonso or his estate. (nly claims
'hich could ha0e been enforced a/ainst the deceased in his lifetime are allo'ed to be
%resented a/ainst his estate, 'ith the e5ce%tion of funeral e5%enses, e5%enses for the
last sicAness and ordinary administration e5%enses.
"s to the alle/ed attachment and le0y of 9oSa $armen's alle/ed administratri5'
fees and share in the estate of 9on "lfonso, the same cannot be /i0en force and
effect in the s%ecial %roceedin/s for the settlement of 9on "lfonso's estate.
he sub1ect of settlement is not the estate of 9oSa $armen. he res%ondent court
is one of limited 1urisdiction and has no authority to decide the claims that may be
%ro%erly %aid out of the funds of 9oSa $armenDs estate. Such must be determined in
se%arate %roceedin/s before the court 'ith 1urisdiction in settlin/ her estate.
)otion for 0econsideration of the 0a!ui%a children"
;here the monetary claim a/ainst the administrator has a relation to his acts of
administration in the ordinary course thereof, such claims can be %resented for
%ayment 'ith the court 'here a s%ecial %roceedin/ for the settlement of the estate is
%endin/, althou/h said claims 'ere not incurred by the deceased durin/ his lifetime
and collectible after his death.
his is so because both administration and administrator is under the direct
su%er0ision and authority of the court.
)otion for 0econsideration of -ntonio >uirino"
.ati0idad $astell0i8<a:uiza and 9oSa $armen (as administratri5 of the estate of
9on "lfonso) had /i0en their conformity to the a'ard of attorney's fees to "tty.
2endoza. Petitioner is esto%%ed from :uestionin/ said a'ard.
-nsofar as %ayment of ser0ice fees to B5e:uiel &loro, the same 'as allo'ed for
ser0ices rendered by claimant for the benefit of the estate of 9on "lfonso and the
same falls under the cate/ory of 6administration e5%ense6 'hich may be %aid out of
the funds of the estate. he heirs of 9on "lfonso had dro%%ed their o%%osition to said
claim thus they are barred from :uestionin/ the same.
2mnibus )otion for 7arly 0esolution and /mmediate 0elease for +unds by the
0a!ui%a .hildren"
he mo0ants seeA a%%ro0al for the release of the amount to taAe care of the burial
e5%enses incurred u%on the death of .ati0idad $astell0i8<a:uiza. Said motion for
release of funds 'as %re0iously %resented and subse:uently denied.
;hat mo0ants are actually %rayin/ of this $ourt is to re0erse the order of denial of
their motion for release of funds. #efore a re0ie' can be made of said order of denial,
they should ha0e filed a %ro%er %etition before this $ourt and not a mere motion.
The motions for reconsideration are 17;/71.
(R8, S1 G 9-10, H1)
."%L" 7. &S!"C, &1. "L.
9 ./+-. 61 (19##)
+-.T5J )ose Bscay and <ufina de Paula, administratri5 of the estate of the late Kictor
Faston, entered into a contract of lease o0er =acienda Puyas .o. 1. Bscay stood as
the lessee and Paula, the lessor. he contract of lease 'as e5ecuted 'ith the courtDs
a%%ro0al.
Cnder the contract of lease the administratri5 'as obli/ed to deli0er to Bscay 10T
of the su/ar, rice and corn %roduced from the =acienda from 1+@7 until the full sum of
P,,000 8 the estimated cost of the %ro%erty transferred to the estate 8 'as fully
co0ered.
Bscay filed his claim a0errin/ that the administratri5 'as indebted to him for
P5,@13.71 as %rinci%al and P2,*32.0* as interest.
he administratri5 o%%osed the claim contendin/ thatJ the court sittin/ in %robate
has no 1urisdiction to entertain the claim, es%ecially the same is bein/ contro0ertedI
the claim is not char/eable a/ainst the estate but a/ainst the administratri5 in her
%ersonal ca%acity since there 'as an o0er%ayment of rentalsI and she 'as not /i0en
the o%%ortunity to contest the claimDs correctness.
he lo'er court ruled in fa0or of Bscay.
/55675J (1) ;hether or not the court has the 1urisdiction to consider the claim in the
administration %roceedin/s.
(2) ;hether or not the claim should be char/eable a/ainst the administratri5 in her
%ersonal ca%acity.
(7) ;hether or not the amounts in the claim may still be contro0erted.
8791J (1) ?BS. he claim is an ordinary demand for the %ayment of the balance of an
account due under a contract of lease entered into by the administratri5 under the
courtDs a%%ro0al.
-n our 1udicial system, there is only one /rade of court of /eneral 1urisdiction
in0ested 'ith %o'er to taAe co/nizance of all Ainds of cases. here are no %robate
courts dedicated to the trial of %robate cases alone.
he %ractice has been for demands a/ainst administrators to be %resented in the
court of first instance 'here the s%ecial %roceedin/ of administration is %endin/, if the
demand has relation to an act of administration and in the ordinary course thereof.
-t can be seen in this case that as the lease contract 'as entered into by the
administratri5 'ith the a%%ro0al of the court in the ordinary course of administration
and 'ith the courtDs a%%ro0al in the administration %roceedin/s, to consider the claim
in the same %roceedin/s may not be denied for the claim %ur%ose to maAe the
administratri5 com%ly 'ith the obli/ations contracted in the course of administration
'ith the courtDs consent and a%%ro0al.
he claimant is not %rohibited from filin/ an inde%endent action to reco0er the
claim, but the e5istence of such a remedy is not a bar to the remedy that he had
%ursued in this case.
(2) ?BS. he consideration of the claim in the administration %roceedin/s,
ho'e0er, does not necessarily mean that the administratri5 may not be held
%ersonally liable for the e5cess.
he mere fact that the court in %assin/ u%on the claim may order the
administratri5 to %ay the full amount of the demand, does not mean that the total
amount 'hich she is com%elled to %ay could be char/eable a/ainst the said estate
under administration.
he court in orderin/ %ayment of the e5cess amount o0er the rentals 'ould hold
the administratri5 %ersonally res%onsible therefor. his ho'e0er do not de%ri0e the
court of %o'er to consider the claimI and the administratri5 is esto%%ed from denyin/
that the amounts recei0ed in e5cess of the true rentals 'ere recei0ed by her in such
ca%acity.
(ne 'ho contracts 'ith another in a re%resentati0e ca%acity cannot claim that
amounts recei0ed by her in said re%resentati0e ca%acity are due from her in another
ca%acity.
(7) .(. "s to the correctness of the amounts stated in the claim, the administratri5
ne0er offered to dis%ro0e them. he administratri5 should ha0e indicated the items the
correctness of 'hich she 'anted to deny. hus all the items 'ere deemed admitted.
(R8, S1, H2)
R&.%8L$! 7. L&454R )& L" R":", &1 "L.
124 ./+-. 1493 (1966)
+-.T5J he estate of the late Bsteban de la <ama 'as the sub1ect of S%ecial
Proceedin/s. he e5ecutor8administrator, Bliseo =er0as, filed the income ta5 returns
of the estate for 1+50 and %aid the corres%ondin/ income ta5.
he #-< later claimed that there had been recei0ed by the estate in 1+50 from the
9e la <ama Steamshi% $om%any, -nc. cash di0idends amountin/ to P3*,300, 'hich
amount 'as not declared.
he #-< then made an assessment of the deficiency income ta5 a/ainst the
estate. he $ollector of -nternal <e0enue 'rote Lourdes de la <ama8(smeSa and
informed her of the assessment and asAed %ayment thereof.
Lourdes' counsel contended that his client did not re%resent the estate, and that
the assessment should be sent to Leonor de la <ama (%ointed to by said counsel as
the administratri5). hereafter, a letter 'as sent to Leonor.
9es%ite the subse:uent letters sent to both Lourdes and Leonor, the deficiency
income ta5 remained un%aid.
he <e%ublic filed a com%laint a/ainst the heirs of Bsteban seeAin/ to collect from
each heir their share in the income ta5 liability of the estate.
he defendants a0erred thatJ no cash di0idends had been %aid to the estateI
Leonor had ne0er been administratri5I and that the e5ecutor of the estate, Bliseo
=er0as, had ne0er been /i0en notice of the assessment, conse:uently the
assessment had ne0er become final.
(n the other hand, the %laintiff ar/ued that the di0idends of P3*,000 'ere a%%lied
to the obli/ation of the estate to 9e la <ama Steamshi% $o. and that the creditin/ of
accounts in the booAs of the com%any constituted constructi0e recei%t by the estate or
the heirs of the di0idends. hus, such di0idends 'ere ta5able income.
he lo'er court dismissed the com%laint.
/55675J (1) ;hether or not the income 'as constructi0ely recei0ed by the estate or
the heirs of the late Bsteban de la <ama.
(2) ;hether or not the ser0ice of the assessment on Lourdes and Leonor de la
<ama 'as 0alid.
(7) ;hether or not the assessment had lon/ become final.
8791J (1) .(. -t is not dis%uted that the di0idends in :uestion 'ere not actually %aid
either to the estate or to the heirs.
-t does not e0en a%%ear that 9e la <ama Steamshi% $o. had e0er filed a claim
a/ainst the estate in connection 'ith that indebtedness. he e5istence U the 0alidity of
the debt are in dis%ute.
-f there had been such indebtedness, the $ourt 'ill a/ree 'ith %laintiff that the
offsettin/ of the di0idends a/ainst such indebtedness amounted to constructi0e
deli0ery. #ut no %roof to that effect has been %resented.
Cnder the .ational -nternal <e0enue $ode, income ta5 is assessed on income
that has been recei0ed. Sec. 5* also re:uires recei%t of income by an estate before
income ta5 can be assessed. hus, no income ta5 can be assessed from income not
recei0ed.
here 'as no basis for the assessment of the income ta5, the assessment itself
and the sendin/ of notices 'ould neither ha0e basis, and so no le/al effect 'ould be
%roduced.
(2) .(. he estate 'as still under the administration of Bliseo =er0as as re/ards
the collection of said di0idends. he administrator 'as the re%resentati0e of the estate
'hose duty it 'as to %ay the ta5es and assessments due to the Fo0ernment.
-n this case, notice 'as first sent to Lourdes and later to Leonor, neither of 'hom
had authority to re%resent the estate.
a5 must be collected from the estate of the deceased, and it is the administrator
'ho is under obli/ation to %ay such claim. he notice of assessment should ha0e
been sent to the administrator.
(7) .(. .otice 'as not sent to the ta5%ayer for the %ur%ose of /i0in/ effect to the
assessment, and said notice could not %roduce any effect. -t a%%earin/ that the
%erson liable for the %ayment of the ta5 did not recei0e the assessment, such could
not become final.
(R8, S1, H3)
:&L3"R 7. (on. 8%&57$">&
19 S!R" 196 (1989)
+-.T5J " 0ehicular accident ha%%ened in Polan/ui, "lbay, 'here a %assen/er bus
o'ned by &elicidad #alla and dri0en by 9omin/o $asin s'er0ed to the left lane and
collided 'ith a &ord &iera o'ned by 2ateo Lim <elucio and dri0en by <uben Lim
<elucio.
&elicidadDs 0ehicle then s'er0ed further to the left this time collidin/ head8on8'ith
a %assen/er bus o'ned by #en1amin &lores and dri0en by &abian Prades.
"s a result of the accident &elicidad #alla, 9omin/o $asin, <uben Lim <elucio
and &abian Prades died on the s%ot.
S%ouses (scar and Kictoria Prades, as the only sur0i0in/ forced heirs of &abian
Prades, filed a com%laint a/ainst the children of &elicidad for dama/es. he com%laint
alle/ed that &elicidad did not obser0e the re:uired dili/ence in the selection her
em%loyee and allo'ed her dri0er to dri0e recAlessly.
he defendants mo0ed to dismiss and a0erred that it is incorrect to hold the
children liable for the alle/ed ne/li/ence of the deceased and to consider suin/ the
heirs of the deceased the same as suin/ the estate of said deceased %erson.
he defendants contend that the creditor should institute the %ro%er intestate
%roceedin/s in 'hich he may be able to inter%ose his claim %ursuant to Section 21 of
<ule 7 of the <ules of $ourt.
<es%ondent court denied the motion to dismiss. Petitioners filed a motion for
reconsideration statin/ that a distinction should be made bet'een a suit a/ainst
&elicidadDs estate and a %ersonal action a/ainst &elicidadDs children.
he %ri0ate res%ondents amended the title of their com%laint by namin/ as
defendants the Bstate of the late &elicidad #alla as re%resented by the children
named in the ori/inal com%laint.
he lo'er court denied the 2< and admitted the amended com%laint.
/5567? ;hether or not the court may entertain a suit for dama/es arisin/ from the
death of a %erson, filed a/ainst the estate of another deceased %erson as re%resented
by the heirs.
8791J ?BS. Section 5 <ule 3* of the <ules of $ourt %ro0ides for the actions that are
abated by death. his case is not amon/ those enumerated thus actions for dama/es
caused by the tortious conduct of the defendant sur0i0e the death of the latter.
he action can therefore be %ro%erly brou/ht under Section 1, <ule 3, of the
<ules of $ourt. =ence, the inclusion of the 6estate of &elicidad #alla6 in the amended
com%laint as defendant.
#ut the %oint of contro0ersy is on the fact that no estate %roceedin/s e5ist since
&elicidadDs children had not filed any %roceedin/s for the settlement of her estate.
;hile %etitioners may ha0e correctly mo0ed for the caseDs dismissal and %ri0ate
res%ondents ha0e corrected the deficiency by filin/ an amended com%laint, the action
'ould still be futile for there are no ste%s taAen to'ards the settlement of &elicidadDs
estate, nor has an e5ecutor or administrator been a%%ointed.
&rom a statement made by the %etitioners that insinuates that the deceased left no
assets, it is reasonable to belie0e that the %etitioners 'ill not taAe any ste% to e5%edite
the early settlement of the estate if only to defeat the dama/e suit a/ainst the estate.
Cnder the circumstances the absence of an estate %roceedin/ may be a0oided by
re:uirin/ the heirs to taAe the deceasedDs %lace.
-n case of unreasonable delay in the a%%ointment of an e5ecutor or administrator
or in case 'here the heirs resort to an e5tra1udicial settlement of the estate, the court
may allo' the heirs of the deceased to be substituted for the deceased.
!ase 5o. 4 Ru-e 8, Se0 1
3.R. 5o. L-#11#1 >u-y 24, 1981
R4:%"L)&6, et.a-, %laintiffs8a%%ellees, 0s. 1$3L"4, et.a-, defendant8a%%ellant.
9a0tsJ (n 2arch 15, 1+*0, <omualdez and others sued "ntonio i/lao to/ether 'ith
&elisa and other /uarantors for the %ayment of un%aid rentals for the lease of a
hacienda and its su/ar :uota. he lo'er court ruled in fa0or of <omualdez and
ordered the defendants to %ay the former yet the 1ud/ment remained unsatisfied.
"nother case 'as filed by <omualdez to re0i0e the said 1ud/ment. -n the meantime,
&elisa had died and her estate, re%resented by 2anin/nin/, 'as settled in the $&- of
<izal.
he administratri5 :uestioned the 1urisdiction of the court a !uo to entertain the suit to
re0i0e 1ud/ment. She in0oAed Sec. 1 of <ule 3, of the <ules of $ourt that, 6.o action
u%on a claim for the reco0ery of money or debt or interest thereon shall be
commenced a/ainst the e5ecutor or administratorI ... 6 $ still ruled in fa0or of
<omualdez.
$ssueJ ;hether or not the action is one for the reco0ery of a sum of money so that it is
barred by Sec. - of <ule 3, of the <ules of $ourt and that the remedy of the a%%ellees
is to %resent their claim in S%ecial Proc. .o. !810,71 of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of
<izal.
(e-*J he ori/inal 1ud/ment 'hich 'as rendered on 2ay 71, 1+*0, has become stale
because of its non8e5ecution after the la%se of fi0e years. "ccordin/ly, it cannot be
%resented a/ainst the Bstate of &elisa i/lao unless it is first re0i0ed by action. his is
%recisely 'hy the a%%ellees ha0e instituted the second suit 'hose ob1ect is not to
maAe the Bstate of &elisa i/lao %ay the sums of money ad1ud/ed in the first
1ud/ment but merely to Aee% ali0e said 1ud/ment so that the sums therein a'arded
can be %resented as claims a/ainst the estate.
!ase 5o. 1 Ru-e 8 Se0 2
3.R. 5o. L-4369 40tober 30, 19#1
>"7$&R 0s."R"5&1", et.a-.
9a0tsJ -n 1+@3, "raneta, in his ca%acity as e5ecutor of the estate of "n/ela S. uason,
offered to sell to the <ural Pro/ress "dministration (<P") a %ortion of the estate
consistin/ of se0en (,) has. he #oard of <P" decided to ac:uire the %ro%erty at the
%rice of P, %er s:uare meter. "raneta acce%ted the terms but made a condition that
all s:uatters and tenants 'ho ha0e no 'ritten contracts 'ith the estate 'ill be mo0ed
to the se/re/ated %ortion of , has. he ne/otiation did not /o any further. (n
9ecember 10, 1+@3, "raneta filed an action for forcible entry a/ainst )a0ier in the
munici%al court of 2anila. $ rendered 1ud/ment in fa0or of "raneta. $&- affirmed the
decision of the 2$ 'ith the addition that the defendant should remo0e her house
and other constructions she had erected on the land in :uestion. "%%eal dismissed on
the /round that it 'as filed beyond the re/lementary %eriod. )a0ier sued out for a 'rit
of certiorari 'ith the S$ seeAin/ the annulment of the decision, but the %etition 'as
dismissed for lacA of merit. he motion to sus%end the order of e5ecution 'as liAe'ise
denied.
#efore the decision of the S$ has become final, a %etition 'as filed in this court
%rayin/ that the dama/es suffered by )a0ier. S$ directed the trial court to maAe a
findin/ of the dama/es alle/edly suffered the same. $ denied the claim for dama/es
because of the death of Lucia )a0ier, the claim should ha0e been filed a/ainst the
estate of the latter.
$ssueJ ;hether or not the trial court 'as correct to deny the claim for dama/es on
account of the death of )a0ier and said that the claim should be filed a/ainst the
estate of the latter
(e-*J .o. his result only obtains if the claim is for reco0ery of money, debt or interest
thereon, and the defendant dies before final 1ud/ment in the $ourt of &irst -nstance,
but not 'hen the claim is for dama/es for an in1ury to %erson or %ro%erty. -n the
%resent %roceedin/, the claim for dama/es has arisen, not 'hile the action 'as
%endin/ in the $ourt of &irst -nstance, but after the case had been decided by the
Su%reme $ourt. 2oreo0er, the claim of res%ondent is nor merely for money or debt
but for dama/es to said res%ondent. hus, $hief )ustice 2oran, commentin/ on
section 1, <ule 7, saysJ 6he abo0e section has no' remo0ed doubts by e5%ressly
%ro0idin/ that the action should be discontinued u%on defendant's death if it is for the
reco0ery of money, debt, or interest thereon, 'hile, on the other hand, in <ule 33,
section 1, it is %ro0ided that actions to recover damages for inury to person or
property, real or %ersonal, may be maintained a/ainst the e5ecutor or administrator of
the deceased.6
(n the other hand, under <ule 7, section 1,, <ules of $ourt, 'hen a %arty dies and
the claim is not thereby e5tin/uished, the court shall order the le/al re%resentati0e of
the deceased, of the heirs, to be substituted for him 'ithin a %eriod of 70 days, or
'ithin such time as may be /ranted. =ere, it a%%ears that no ste% has so far been
taAen relati0e to the settlement of the estate, nor an e5ecutor or administrator of the
estate has been a%%ointed. his deficiency may be ob0iated by maAin/ the heirs taAe
the %lace of the deceased.
$ase .o. 2 <ule 3, Sec 2
3.R. 5o. L-6636 "u,ust 2, 19#4
!"8%C"4 0s. )4:$534 !""38"C, &1 "L
9a0tsJ $abuyao alle/ed that he is the 6lone com%ulsory heir6 of the s%ouses
Prudencio $abuyao and 9omin/a $aa/bay, 'ho died lea0in/ the ele0en (11) %arcels
of land, and that, althou/h %laintiff had ad1udicated said %ro%erties to himself %ursuant
to section 1 of <ule ,@ of the <ules of $ourt, the corres%ondin/ transfer certificates of
title could not be issued in his name because the ori/inal o'ner's du%licate certificates
'ere bein/ 'ithheld by the defendants,'ho had also taAen %ossession of said %arcels
of land, and 'ould continue unla'fully usin/ the same and committin/ acts of
dis%ossession thereof, unless en1oined by the court.
Plaintiff filed, on )une 12, 1+52, an amended com%laint, 'hich the defendants sou/ht
to dismiss u%on the /round that 6%laintiff has no le/al ca%acity to sue,6 there bein/ no
alle/ation that 6%laintiff had been 1udicially declared lone com%ulsory heir6 of the
deceased s%ouses Prudencio $abuyao and 9omin/a $aa/bay. -t is not denied, that
the lands in dis%ute belon/s ori/inally to the s%ouses Prudencio $abuyao and
9omin/a $aa/bay, 'ho 'ere le/ally marriedI that %laintiff 9amaso $abuyao is their
6lone6 le/itimate childI and that the defendants are ne%he's and nieces of 9omin/a
$aa/bay, e5ce%t of 9efendant 9omin/o $aa/bay, 'ho is her brother. $ dismissed
the case as no action can be maintained until a 1udicial declaration of heirshi% has
been le/ally secured. 2< denied.
$ssueJ ;hether or not under the fore/oin/ facts, 'hich, for %ur%ose of this a%%eal,
must be assumed to be true, %laintiff has a cause of action to reco0er the %ro%erties in
dis%ute and to :uiet his alle/ed title thereto
(e-*J he ri/ht to assert a cause of action as an alle/ed heir, althou/h he has not
been 1udicially declared to be so, has been acAno'led/ed in a number of subse:uent
cases. he %ro%erty of the deceased, both real and %ersonal, became the property of
the heir by the mere fact of death of his %redecessor in interest, and he could deal
'ith it in %recisely the same 'ay in 'hich the deceased could ha0e dealt 'ith it,
sub1ect only to the limitations 'hich by la' or by contract 'ere im%osed u%on the
deceased himself. ... (Suilion/ and $o. 0s" 2arine -nsurance $o., Ltd., et al., 12 Phil.,
17, 1+.)
3R 5o. 31328-R 9ebruary 2, 196#
8ana0+/an, et.a-. v. "-+bo*bo*, et.a-.
9a0tsJ Lot .o. 1@, located in #arrio "%laya, Sta. <osa, La/una, 'as o'ned by Bulalio
"lmodo0ar, 'ho ac:uired it from the #ureau of Lands. C%on his death,the lot 'as
trasmitted in e:ual shares, by o%eration of la', to his 2 sur0i0in/ children, 9ionisio
and &eli%a. ;hen 9ionisio died, half of his share of the lot 'as transmitted to his son,
and 'hen &eli%a died, half of her share of the lot 'as transmitted to her children <ufo,
&eliciano, #enito and $armen #ancihan.
(n 2ay 7, 1+50, co8o'ner Ladislao, 'ho 'as in %ossession of the land, e5ecuted a
%ublic instrument 'hich 'as, in form, a sale of the land for the orice of P500 in fa0or
of S%s. "libodbod and &elisa Libas. Kendees immediately tooA %ossession of the land.
he la'yer of the #ancihans 'rote "libodbod informin/ the same that they o'ned 142
of the lot and that they demanded reco0ery of their share. <ecei0in/ no re%ly,
#anacihans and Ladislao filed a re0indicatory action a/ainst the "libodbods. $ase
dismissed.
$ssueJ ;hether or not the $ erred in findin/ that the #anacihans' action to reco0er
'as %remature
(e-*J ?es. he transmission of the inheritance to the heirs is from the moment of
death and it is not necessary that they be declared as =B-<S before they can e5ercise
the ri/ht to brin/ a re0indicatory action in their o'n names a/ainst the %ossessor or
holder of a %iece of land inherited by them.
$ase no. @ <ule 3, Sec 2
3.R. 5o. L-2#049 "u,ust 30, 1968
R":$R&6, et.a-. 0s. 8"L1"6"R, et.a-.
9a0tsJ (n )anuary *,1+5+, Kictoriana B/uaras sin/le, made and e5ecuted a real
estate mort/a/e o0er a %arcel of land, o'ned by her in fee sim%le, as security for a
loan of P2,1,0.00 in fa0or of the s%ouses "rtemio #altazar and Susana &lores.
;hen the morta/a/or died, the mort/a/ees filed a %etition for the intestate
%roceedin/s of her estate in the $&- of La/una, 'herein said mort/a/es, as
%etitioners, alle/ed that &ilemon <amirez and 2onica <amirez are the heirs of the
deceased. &ilemon 'as a%%ointed administrator of the estateI ho'e0er, ha0in/ failed
to :ualify, the court a%%ointed "rtemio 9ia'an, then a de%uty clerA of court,
administrator of the estate 'ho, in due time, :ualified for the office.
(n 1+ "%ril 1+*1, S%s. #altazar filed a com%laint for foreclosure of the aforesaid
mort/a/e, a/ainst "rtemio 9ia'an, in his ca%acity as administrator of the estate. he
latter failed to ans'er and 'as thereafter declared in default. (rder 'as made to
foreclose the %ro%erty and sell the same 'ithin +0 days. he hi/hest bidders 'ere the
#altazar's.
he <amirezes and )ose B/uaras, the former bein/ the heirs named in the %etition for
intestate %roceedin/s, sou/ht to annul the foreclosure of the mort/a/e by the
#altazars and "rtemio 9ia'an, in his ca%acity as administrator of the estate of
Kictoriana B/uaras.
he defendants s%ouses, "rtemio #altazar and Susana &lores, filed a motion to
dismiss the com%laint on the /round that the %laintiffs ha0e no le/al ca%acity to sueI
defendant 9ia'an liAe'ise mo0ed to dismiss on t'o /roundsJ that %laintiffs ha0e no
le/al ca%acity to sue and that the com%laint states no cause of action. $ ruled in
fa0or of defendants. 2< denied.
$ssueJ ;hether or not the court erred
(e-*J ?es. here is no :uestion that the ri/hts to succession are automatically
transmitted to the heirs from the moment of the death of the decedent. -n 4ascual vs"
4ascual,

it 'as ruled that althou/h heirs ha0e no le/al standin/ in court u%on the
commencement of testate or intestate %roceedin/s, this rule admits of an e5ce%tion as
6'hen the administrator fails or refuses to act in 'hich e0ent the heirs may act in his
%lace.6
Since the /round for the %resent action to annul the aforesaid foreclosure %roceedin/s
is the fraud resultin/ from such insidious machinations and collusion in 'hich the
administrator has alle/edly %artici%ated, it 'ould be farfetched to e5%ect the said
administrator himself to file the action in behalf of the estate. "nd 'ho else but the
heirs, 'ho ha0e an interest to assert and to %rotect, 'ould brin/ the action> -ne0itably,
this case should fall under the e5ce%tion, rather than the /eneral rule that %endin/
%roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate, the heirs ha0e no ri/ht to commence an
action arisin/ out of the ri/hts belon/in/ to the deceased.
3R 5o. 31328-R 9ebruary 2, 196#
8ana0+/an, et.a-. v. "-+bo*bo*, et.a-.
9a0tsJ Lot .o. 1@, located in #arrio "%laya, Sta. <osa, La/una, 'as o'ned by Bulalio
"lmodo0ar, 'ho ac:uired it from the #ureau of Lands. C%on his death,the lot 'as
trasmitted in e:ual shares, by o%eration of la', to his 2 sur0i0in/ children, 9ionisio
and &eli%a. ;hen 9ionisio died, half of his share of the lot 'as transmitted to his son,
and 'hen &eli%a died, half of her share of the lot 'as transmitted to her children <ufo,
&eliciano, #enito and $armen #ancihan.
(n 2ay 7, 1+50, co8o'ner Ladislao, 'ho 'as in %ossession of the land, e5ecuted a
%ublic instrument 'hich 'as, in form, a sale of the land for the orice of P500 in fa0or
of S%s. "libodbod and &elisa Libas. Kendees immediately tooA %ossession of the land.
he la'yer of the #ancihans 'rote "libodbod informin/ the same that they o'ned 142
of the lot and that they demanded reco0ery of their share. <ecei0in/ no re%ly,
#anacihans and Ladislao filed a re0indicatory action a/ainst the "libodbods. $ase
dismissed.
$ssueJ ;hether or not the $ erred in findin/ that the #anacihans' action to reco0er
'as %remature
(e-*J ?es. he transmission of the inheritance to the heirs is from the moment of
death and it is not necessary that they be declared as =B-<S before they can e5ercise
the ri/ht to brin/ a re0indicatory action in their o'n names a/ainst the %ossessor or
holder of a %iece of land inherited by them.
.au-aJs .art
1. Lao vs. )eo 90 . 868
8 'ron/ citation
2. )e- Rosar+o vs. )e- Rosar+o 2 . 321
9"!1S'
9ona =onorata 9el <osario died lea0in/ a last 'ill. -n the ninth clause, the
testatri5 be:ueathed the sum of P7000 to her ne%he's Bnri:ue Floria and <amon 9el
<osario in e:ual %arts. 9on <amon 9el <osario, one of the %ersons mentioned in the
'ill, brou/ht an action a/ainst 9on $lemente del <osario, the e5ecutor, for the
%ayment of his share in the le/acy.
$SS%& an* R&S4L%1$45S'
a. FK5 Ra;on, t/e -e,atee, 0an *e;an* t/e 2ay;ent o< /+s -e,a0y <ro; )on
!-e;ente, t/e eIe0utorL
?es. ;here the 'ill authorizes the e5ecutor to %ay le/acies, e5%ressly or by
natural inference, action 'ill lie by the le/atee a/ainst the e5ecutor to com%el
allo'ance and %ayment thereof. he %o'ers /i0en to the e5ecutor by the 'ill of 9ona
=onorata are contained in the 1@
th
clause 'hich is as follo's, G"t her death they shall
taAe %ossession of all such /oods and thin/s as may be her %ro%erty, and are hereby
authorized fully and as re:uired by la' to %re%are and in0entory of said %ro%erty, and
to effect the di0ision and %artition of the estate amon/ her heirs.E -f the e5ecutor 'as
not authorized to %ay these le/acies, the heirs must %ay them. he im%ortant %o'er of
maAin/ the %artition 'as attem%ted to be /i0en to he e5ecutors. -n 0ie' of this
considerations and a study of the 'hole 'ill, 'e hold that the e5ecutors are /i0en
%o'er to %ay the le/acies.
.ote that in an action to com%el %ayment of le/acies the defense that an
in0entory is bein/ formed or that creditors ha0e not been %aid must be set u% in the
ans'er in order to be a0ailed of.
b. FK5 t/e eIe0utor /as 2o?er to ;aMe 2art+t+onL
.o. hou/h such %o'er is e5%ressly /i0en by the 'ill, said %ro0ision is 0oid
under the terms of article 105, of the ci0il code 'hich is as follo's, G he testator may,
by an act inter 0i0os or cause mortis, intrust the mere %o'er of maAin/ the di0ision
after his death to any %erson 'ho is not one of the coheirs.E "rticle 105, %rohibited an
heir from bein/ contador for the 0ery reason that the %artition should be made
im%artially. -n this case, 9on $lemente, the e5ecutor, a/ainst 'hom the action 'as
directed, 'as also named as an heir %ursuant to the ,
th
clause of her 'ill.
"lthou/h tne e5ecutor has no %o'er to maAe the %artition, the heirs can do
so. he %laintiff is not bound to remain a coo'ner 'ith the other heirs. #ein/ a le/atee
of an ali:uot %art, he has the ri/ht to seeA a %artition that an heir has. #ut in so
seeAin/ it he must maAe %arties to his suit all %ersons interested in the estate. his he
has not done in this suit, and he conse:uently is not entitled to the %artition ordered by
the court belo'.
3. Lo2ez vs. 4-bes 1# . #40
9"!1S'
(n (ctober 17, 1+03, <icardo Lo%ez et al. brou/ht suit a/ainst "dolfo
(lbes, the testamentary e5ecutor of the deceased 2artina Lo%ez (the mother of
<icardo and /randmother of the other %laintiffs), alle/in/ in their com%laint that
2artina e5ecuted a %ublic instrument 'hereby she donated to %laintiffs a %arcel of
hem% land situated at the %lace called "li, in the %ueblo of Fuinobatan, "lbay and that
the said (lbes, as e5ecutor, claimed to ha0e ri/hts of o'nershi% and %ossession to
the said land ad0erse to those then held by the %laintiffs, inasmuch as the said estate
still continued to belon/ to the deceased 2artina Lo%ez and 'as then in char/e of a
trustee by 0irtue of an a/reement had bet'een the attorneys of the e5ecutor and the
%laintiff <icardo, and of the order issued by the court in the aforesaid %robate
%roceedin/s. he com%laint concluded by asAin/ that 1ud/ment be rendered in the
latterDs fa0or and a/ainst the defendant for the o'nershi% and %ossession of the said
land.
he defendant filed a demurrer in 'ritin/ alle/in/ that the %laintiffs, as the
heirs or donees could not maintain any suit a/ainst the testamentary e5ecutor to
reco0er the title or %ossession of the land so lon/ as the court had not ad1udicated the
estate to them or until the time allo'ed for %ayin/ the debts should ha0e e5%ired,
unless they be /i0en %ossession of the said land by the e5ecutor. he trial court
sustained the demurrer of the defendant and dismissed the case.
$SS%&'
;4. the %laintiffs ha0e the ri/ht of o'nershi% and %ossession o0er the %arcel of hem%
land>
(&L)'
?es. he action e5ercised by <icardo et al is based on the ri/hts 'hich as
such donees had ac:uired by 0irtue of the donation inter 0i0os made by 2artina
Lo%ez durin/ her lifetime on fa0or of %laintiffs by an instrument the donor, a donation
e5%ressly acce%ted on the same date by the donees and of 'hich acce%tance the
donor 'as also informed on the same dateI 'herefore, these re:uirements of the la'
ha0in/ been com%lied 'ith, it is un:uestionable that the dominion o0er the land
donated 'as %ro%erly transmitted to the donees 'ho in fact and by o%eration of la'
ac:uired the o'nershi% of the %ro%erty, as customarily occurs in all contracts of
transfer of dominion.
Pro%erty of the testate estate of the deceased 2artina Lo%ez is not here
concerned. 9urin/ her lifetime she /a0e a'ay the land mentioned, in the e5ercise
%ertained to her as o'ner. #y 0irtue of the said donation the sole and true o'ners of
the land donated are the %laintiffs, so lon/ as said donation is not %ro0en null,
inefficacious, or irre/ular. "ll the :uestions 'hich by reason of the same are raised by
the interested %arties must be heard in a re/ular trial and decided by a final 1ud/ment
absolutely inde%endent of the %robate %roceedin/s concernin/ the estate of the
deceased, 'ho 'as the %re0ious o'ner of the land concernedI and therefore the
com%laint of the donees should not ha0e been dismissed, but the trial should ha0e
been %roceeded 'ith to final 1ud/ment.
4. 7e-asNuez vs. F+--+a; 3eor,e et a- 12# S 4#6
9"!1S'
2aria Kelas:uez Kda. 9e Feor/e and her children a%%ealed from the
decision of the $&- of #ulacan, 'hich dismissed their com%laint for lacA of 1urisdiction.
Plaintiffs are the 'ido' and le/itimate children of the late #en1amin Feor/e 'hose
estate is under intestate %roceedin/s. -n their com%laint, %laintiffs alle/ed that the 5
defendant8mort/a/ors (982ors) are officers of the -slan "ssociates -nc. "ndres
2unoz, aside from bein/ the treasurer8director of said cor%., 'as also a%%ointed and
:ualified as administrator of the estate of #en1amin Feor/e in the abo0e s%ecial
%roceedin/s. -n life, the latter o'ned *@.3T or *7* shares out of +30 shares of stocA
in the cor%. ;ithout %rior a%%ro0al from the %robate court and 'ithout notice to the
heirs and their counsel, the 982ors e5ecuted a 9eed of &irst <eal Bstate 2ort/a/e
(9&<B2) in fa0or of the defendant8mort/a/ee (982ee) Brlinda Killanue0a, co0erin/ 7
%arcels of land o'ned by -sland "ssoc. -n said 9eed, the 982ors also e5%ressly
'ai0ed their ri/ht to redeem the said %arcels. Subse:uently, a %o'er of atty (P(")
'as e5ecuted by the 982ors in fa0or of Killanue0a 'hereby the latter 'as /i0en full
%o'er and authority to cede, transfer and con0ey the %arcels of land 'ithin the
re/lementary %eriod %ro0ided by la' for redem%tion. " certificate of sale ($S) 'as
e5ecuted in fa0or of Killanue0a after she submitted the hi/hest bids at the %ublic
"uction. his led to the e5ecution of a 9eed of Sale and "ffida0it of $onsolidation of
('nershi% ("$() by 0irtue of 'hich $s co0erin/ the 7 %arcels 'ere cancelled and
ne' $s 'ere issued in fa0or of Killanue0a.
Plaintiffs therefore filed a com%laint for the annulment of the 9&<B2, P(",
$S, "$( and the ne' $s. Killanue0a contends that the %laintiffs8a%%ellants ha0e no
ca%acity to file the com%laint because the /eneral rule laid do'n in <3,, sec7 of the
<ules of $ourt states that only the administrator or e5ecutor of the estate may brin/
actions of such nature as the one in the case at bar. he only e5ce%tion is 'hen the
e5ecutor or administrator is un'illin/ or fails or refuses to act, 'hich e5ce%tion does
not a%%ly in the %resent case. $ dismissed the com%laint.
$SS%&'
;4. the %laintiffs8a%%ellants ha0e the ca%acity to file the com%laint>
(&L)'
?es. he contention that the %ro%er %arty to file the com%laint is the
administrator of the estate of #en1amin Feor/e is 'ithout merit. he administrator,
"ndres 2unoz, is the same %erson char/ed by the %laintiffs8a%%ellants to ha0e 0oted
in the #oard of 9irectors 'ithout securin/ the %ro%er authority from the %robate court
to 'hich he is accountable as administrator. -n 0amire% vs 3alta%ar 'e ruled that
since the /round for the %resent action to annul the aforesaid foreclosure %roceedin/s
is the fraud resultin/ from such insidious machinations and collusion in 'hich the
administrator has alle/edly %artici%ated, it 'ould be far fetched to e5%ect the said
administrator himself to file the action in behalf of the estate. "nd 'ho else but the
heirs, 'ho ha0e an interest to assert and to %rotect, 'ould brin/ the action> -ne0itably,
this case should fall under the e5ce%tion, rather than the /eneral rule that %endin/
%roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate, the heirs ha0e no ri/ht to commence an
action arisin/ out of the ri/hts belon/in/ to the deceased.E he case at bar falls under
such an e5ce%tion.
#. 3o0/an vs. Coun, 3#4 S 20
9"!1S'
&eli5 Fochan Sr.Ds dau/hter, "lice, mother of herein res%ondents, inherited
50 shares of stocA in Fochan <ealty from the former. "lice died lea0in/ the 50 share
to her husband, )ohn ?oun/ Sr. -n 1+*2, the <$ of $ebu ad1udicated *>1@ of these
shares to her children. =a0in/ earned di0idends, these stocAs numbered 1,+ by
Se%tember 20, 1+,+. &i0e days later, at 'hich time all the children had reached the
a/e of ma1ority, their father )ohn, Sr. <e:uested Fochan <ealty to %artition the shares
of his late 'ife by cancelin/ the stocA certificates in his name and issuin/ in lieu
thereof, ne' stocA certificates in the names of his children. Fochan <ealty refused
citin/ as reason the ri/ht of first refusal /ranted to the remainin/ stocAholders by the
"rticles of -ncor%oration. )ohn, Sr. died lea0in/ the shares to the res%ondents. (n &eb
3, 1++@, $ecilia Fochan Cy and 2i/uel uy filed a com%laint 'ith the SB$ for issuance
of shares of stocA to the ri/htful o'ners, nullification of shares of stocAs and
recon0eyance of %ro%erty im%ressed 'ith trust, accountin/ etc. a/ainst res%ondents.
Petitioners mo0ed to dismiss the com%laint alle/in/ that (1) SB$ has no
1urisdiction and (2) the res%ondents 'ere not the real %arties8in8interest and had no
ca%acity to sue.
$SS%&S an* R&S4L%1$45S'
a. ;4. SB$ has 1urisdiction>
.o. -n 0ie' of the effecti0ity of <" 3,++, the case should be remanded to
the %ro%er re/ional trial court, not to the SB$.
b. ;4. the res%ondents had the ca%acity to sue>
?es. Petitioners claim that G'hen the estate is under administration, suits for
the reco0ery or %rotection of the %ro%erty or ri/hts of the deceased may be brou/ht
only by the administrator or e5ecutor as a%%ro0ed by courtE he rules relati0e to this
matter (%articularly section7 of <ule 7 and Sec2 of <ule 3, of the <ules of $ourt) do
not, ho'e0er, maAe any such cate/orical and confinin/ statement. ;hile %ermittin/
and e5ecutor or administrator to re%resent or to brin/ suits on behalf of the deceased,
the said rules do not %rohibit the heirs from re%resentin/ the deceased. hese rules
are easily a%%licable to cases in 'hich an administrator has already been a%%ointed.
#ut no rule cate/orically addresses the situation in 'hich s%ecial %roceedin/s for the
settlement of an estate ha0e already been instituted, yet no administrator has been
a%%ointed. -n such instances, the heirs cannot be e5%ected to 'ait for the a%%ointment
of an administratorI then 'ait further to see if the administrator a%%ointed 'ould care
enou/h to file a suit to %rotect the ri/hts and the interests of the deceasedI and in the
meantime do nothin/ 'hile the ri/hts and the %ro%erties of the decedent are 0iolated
or dissi%ated.
&or the %rotection of the interests of the decedents, this court has in
%re0ious instances reco/nized the heirs as %ro%er re%resentati0es of the decedent,
e0en 'hen there is already an administrator a%%ointed by the court. ;hen no
administrator has been a%%ointed, as in this case, there is all the more reason to
reco/nize the heirs as the %ro%er re%resentati0es of the deceased. Since the <ules do
not s%ecifically %rohibit them from re%resentin/ the deceased, and since no
administrator had as yet been a%%ointed at the time of the institution of the com%laint
'ith the SB$, 'e see nothin/ 'ron/ 'ith the fact that it 'as the heirs of )ohn ?oun/
Sr. 'ho re%resented his estate in the case filed before the SB$.
&:$LJS ."R1
<ule 3, Sections @85
3$L !"L$:8"S (as a*;+n+strator o< t/e *e0ease* :ort,a,ee "nse-;a "n,e-es)
vs. S&7&R$5" ."3%$4 (:ort,a,or)
-n administrator of the estate of a deceased person may, without special authority of
the probate court, bring an action on behalf of the estate to foreclose a mortgage or
enforce payment of a debt"
9"!1S' his case is a foreclosure %roceedin/ instituted by the Plaintiff8"dministrator
$alimbas in behalf of the estate of the deceased "nselma "n/eles.
he com%laint alle/es that $alimbas is the duly a%%ointed administrator of the estate
of the deceased "n/eles and that the defendant Se0erina Pa/uio 'as indebted to the
deceased in the amount of P5,*+@, dra'in/ interest at the rate of P7*+ %er annum as
e0idenced by a document e5ecuted by the defendant on said date in fa0or of the
deceasedI that the interest on the debt from )anuary 2, 1+1@, to )anuary 2, 1+27,
amountin/ to the sum of P7,5*@ is still due and un%aidI that to secure the debt, 'ith
interest, a mort/a/e u%on the %ro%erty described in certificate of title .o. 10@@ of the
re/istry of deeds of the Pro0ince of #ataan 'as /i0en and 'hich %ro%erty consists of
lot .o. +05 of the cadaster of the munici%ality of PilarI that the said mort/a/e is
re/istered and entered u%on said certificate of title .o. 10@@I that the ori/inal of the
document e0idencin/ the mort/a/e is in the %ossession of the defendant accordin/ to
the information and belief of the %laintiff and that not'ithstandin/ a dili/ent search no
co%y or du%licate of said document has been found in the office of the clerA of the
$ourt of &irst -nstance, or in the office of the re/ister of deeds of said %ro0ince, or in
the Feneral Land <e/istration (ffice, or in the Phili%%ine Library and 2useumI and
that the defendant has %aid no %art of the interest thereon subse:uent to )anuary 2,
1+1@.
9efendant Pa/uio in her ans'er denies /enerally the alle/ations of the com%laint.
She also filed a demurrer, one of the /rounds bein/ that the %laintiff $alimbas does
not ha0e the le/al ca%acity to brin/ the action.
$SS%& (<ele0ant to <ule 3, Section 5 of our %resent rules)J ;o. $alimbas had the
authority to brin/ the action to foreclose the mort/a/e e0en in the absence of an
e5%ress authority from the %robate court>
(&L)J $alimbas has authority.
"n administrator need not obtain s%ecial authority from a court before brin/in/ an
action such as the %resent on behalf of the estate under administrationI he is
e5%ressly authorized to do so by section ,02 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure.
<ule 3, Section *
$51&S1"1& &S1"1& 49 1(& )&!&"S&) 3&L"!$4 S&8$"L. 8&5>":$5"
S&8$"L, 2et+t+oner-a22e--ee, vs. R48&R1" S&8$"L, >%L$"54 S&8$"L an*
(&$RS 49 8"L8$5" S&8$"L, o22os+tors-a22e--ants.
)atters affecting property under the administration may be taken cogni%ance of by the
probate court in the course of the intestate proceedings provided that the interest of
third persons are not preudiced" 8owever, the third person to whom the decedent@s
assets had been fraudulently conveyed may be cited to appear in court and may be
examined under oath as to how they came into the possession of the decedent@s
assets but a separate action is necessary to recover said assets"
9"!1SJ Felacio Sebial died intestate in 1+@7 in Pinamun/a1an $ebu. "ccordin/ to the
a%%ellants, Felacio Sebial, by his first 'ife Leoncia 2aniAis, 'ho alle/edly died in
1+1+, be/ot three children named <oberta, #albina and )uliano. #y his second 'ife,
9olores Bnad, 'hom he alle/edly married in 1+2,, he su%%osedly be/ot si5 children
named #en1amina, Kalentina, $iriaco, Fre/oria, Bs%eranza and Luciano.
#en1amina Sebial filed a %etition for settlement and %rayed that she be a%%ointed
administratri5 thereof. <oberta Sebial o%%osed the %etition on the /round that the
estate of Felacio Sebial had already been %artitioned amon/ his children and that, if
an administration %roceedin/ 'as necessary, she, <oberta Sebial, a resident of
Fuimba'ian, a remote mountain barrio of Pinamun/a1an, 'here the decedent's estate
'as su%%osedly located, should be the one a%%ointed administratri5 and not
#en1amina Sebial, a housemaid 'orAin/ at alisay, $ebu 'hich is about se0enty
Ailometers a'ay from Pinamun/a1an. -n a su%%lemental o%%osition the children of the
first marria/e contended that the remedy of #en1amina Sebial 'as an action to
rescind the %artition.
he lo'er court a%%ointed #en1amina Sebial as administratri5. -t found that the
descedent left an estate consistin/ of lands 'ith an area of t'enty8one hectares,
0alued at more than si5 thousand %esos, and that the alle/ed %artition of the
decedent's estate 'as in0alid and ineffecti0e.
he o%%ositors mo0ed for the reconsideration of the order a%%ointin/ #en1amina
Sebial as administratri5. hey insisted that the decedent's estate had been %artitioned
on "u/ust 2+, 1+@5.
(n "%ril 2,, 1+*1 #en1amina Sebial filed an in0entory and a%%raisal of the decedent's
estate alle/edly consistin/ of se0en unre/istered %arcels of land. he o%%ositors
re/istered their o%%osition to the in0entory on the /round that the se0en %arcels of
land enumerated in the in0entory no lon/er formed %art of the decedent's estate.
(n 2ay *, 1+*1, the administratri5 filed a motion to re:uire Lorenzo <ematado,
9emetrio $amillo and the s%ouses <oberta Sebial and Lazaro <ecuelo to deli0er to
her the %arcels of land.
he lo'er court re:uired the administratri5 to furnish the court 'ith another in0entory.
he administratri5 re%roduced her earlier in0entory but added t'o houses alle/edly
recei0ed by the children of the first marria/e. "n o%%osition 'as inter%osed to the said
in0entory.
(%%ositors8a%%ellants a%%ealed from the t'o orders of the %robate court both dated
9ecember 11, 1+*1, one a%%ro0in/ the amended in0entory of the decedent's estate
filed by the duly a%%ointed administratri5 and the other directin/ the heirs or %ersons
in %ossession of certain %ro%erties of the estate to deli0er them to the administratri5.
(%%ositors8a%%ellants claim, amon/ many %oints, that the 0aluation of the in0entoried
%ro%erties 'ere faAe, fictitious and fantasticI that the in0entory is not su%%orted by
documentary e0idenceI and that an ordinary ci0il action is necessary to reco0er the
lands in %ossession of third %ersons.
$SS%& (rele0ant to Section * <ule 3, of the %resent rules)J
;hether an ordinary ci0il action for reco0ery of %ro%erty and not an administration
%roceedin/ is the %ro%er remedy, considerin/ o%%ositors' alle/ation that the estate of
Felacio Sebial 'as %artitioned in 1+@5 and that some of his heirs had already sold
their res%ecti0e shares
(&L)' he %robate court should ascertain 'hat assets constituted the estate of
Felacio Sebial, 'hat ha%%ened to those assets and 'hether the children of the
second marria/e (the %etitioner 'as a child of the second marria/e and the %rinci%al
o%%ositor 'as a child of first marria/e) could still ha0e a share, ho'soe0er small, in
the decedent's estate.
he said order is erroneous and should be set aside because the %robate court failed
to recei0e e0idence as to the o'nershi% of the said %arcels of land. he /eneral rule is
that :uestions of title to %ro%erty cannot be %assed u%on in a testate or intestate
%roceedin/. =o'e0er, 'hen the %arties are all heirs of the decedent, it is o%tional
u%on them to submit to the %robate court the :uestion of title to %ro%erty and, 'hen so
submitted, the %robate court may definitely %ass 1ud/ment thereon.
Lorenzo <ematado and Lazaro <ecuelo are not heirs of the decedent. hey are third
%ersons. he rule is that matters affectin/ %ro%erty under administration may be taAen
co/nizance of by the %robate court in the course of the intestate %roceedin/ %ro0ided
that the interests of third %ersons are not %re1udiced.
=o'e0er, third %ersons to 'hom the decedent's assets had been fraudulently
con0eyed may be cited to a%%ear in court and be e5amined under oath as to ho' they
came into the %ossession of the decedent's assets (Sec. *, <ule 3,, <ules of $ourt)
but a se%arate action 'ould be necessary to reco0er the said assets.
he %robate court should recei0e e0idence on the discordant contentions of the
%arties as to the assets of decedent's estate, the 0aluations thereof and the ri/hts of
the transferees of some of the assets.
he %robate court should re:uire the %arties to %resent further %roofs on the
o'nershi% of the se0en %arcels of land and the materials of the t'o houses
enumerated in the amended in0entory of .o0ember 1,, 1+*1, on the alle/ed %artition
effected in 1+@5 and on the alle/ations in o%%ositors' in0entory dated .o0ember ,,
1+*1.
Probate courtDs order set aside. $ase remanded for further %roceedin/s.
8&11C !(%", >&55$9&R !(%"-L4!S$5, 8&5$S45 !(%" "5) 8"L)F$5 !(%"
vs. "8S4L%1& :"5"3&:&51 !4R.4R"1$45, !"
Third persons to whom the decedents assets had been conveyed may be cited to
appear in court and examined under oath as to how they came into possession of the
decedents assets" /n case of fraudulent conveyances, a separate action is necessary
to recover these assets"
9"!1SJ #etty . $hua 'as a%%ointed as administratri5 of the intestate estate of the
deceased )ose L. $hua. hereafter, she submitted to the trial court an in0entory of all
the real and %ersonal %ro%erties of the deceased. "bsolute 2ana/ement $or%oration,
one of the creditors of the deceased, filed a claim a/ainst the estate of the deceased
in the amount of P*7.,2. "s administratri5, #etty . $hua tentati0ely acce%ted said
amount as correct, 'ith a statement that it shall be reduced or ad1usted as e0idence
may 'arrant.
"bsolute 2ana/ement $or%oration noticed that the deceasedDs shares of stocAs 'ith
"yala Sales $or%oration and "yala $onstruction Su%%ly, -nc. 'ere not included in the
in0entory of assets. "s a conse:uence, it filed a motion to re:uire #etty . $hua to
e5%lain 'hy she did not re%ort these shares of stocAs in the in0entory. hrou/h a
re%ly, #etty . $hua alle/ed that these shares had already been assi/ned and
transferred to other %arties %rior to the death of her husband, )ose L. $hua. She
attached to her re%ly the deeds of assi/nment 'hich alle/edly constituted %roofs of
transfer. )ud/e 9umatol acce%ted the e5%lanation as meritorious.
"bsolute 2ana/ement $or%oration, sus%ectin/ that the documents attached to #etty
. $huaDs re%ly 'ere s%urious and simulated, filed a motion for the e5amination of the
su%%osed transferees based on Section *, <ule 3,.
Pri0ate res%ondents o%%osed the motion on the /round that this %ro0ision bears no
a%%lication to the case. (n &ebruary ,, 2000, )ud/e 9umatol issued the assailed
order, denyin/ the motion of the cor%oration as it 'as seen as a mere fishin/
e5%edition on its %art. $" re0ersed, allo'in/ the motion.
$SS%&J 'hether the $ourt of "%%eals correctly ordered the trial court to /i0e due
course to the 2otion for B5amination
(&L)J $" 'as correct.
Section * of <ule 3, seeAs to secure e0idence from %ersons sus%ected of ha0in/
%ossession or Ano'led/e of the %ro%erties left by a deceased %erson, or of ha0in/
concealed, embezzled or con0eyed any of the %ro%erties of the deceased.
he court 'hich ac:uires 1urisdiction o0er the %ro%erties of a deceased %erson
throu/h the filin/ of the corres%ondin/ %roceedin/s has su%er0ision and control o0er
these %ro%erties. he trial court has the inherent duty to see to it that the in0entory of
the administrator lists all the %ro%erties, ri/hts and credits 'hich the la' re:uires the
administrator to include in his in0entory. -n com%liance 'ith this duty, the court also
has the inherent %o'er to determine 'hat %ro%erties, ri/hts and credits of the
deceased the administrator should include or e5clude in the in0entory. "n heir or
%erson interested in the %ro%erties of a deceased may call the courtDs attention that
certain %ro%erties, ri/hts or credits are left out from the in0entory. -n such a case, it is
liAe'ise the courtDs duty to hear the obser0ations of such %arty. he court has the
%o'er to determine if such obser0ations deser0e attention and if such %ro%erties
belon/ prima facie to the estate.
=o'e0er, in such %roceedin/s the trial court has no authority to decide 'hether
the %ro%erties, real or %ersonal, belon/ to the estate or to the %ersons e5amined. -f
after such e5amination there is /ood reason to belie0e that the %erson e5amined is
Aee%in/ %ro%erties belon/in/ to the estate, then the administrator should file an
ordinary action in court to reco0er the same. -nclusion of certain shares of stocA by the
administrator in the in0entory does not automatically de%ri0e the assi/nees of their
shares. hey ha0e a ri/ht to be heard on the :uestion of o'nershi%, 'hen that
%ro%erty is %ro%erly %resented to the court.
-n the %resent case, some of the transferees of the shares of stocA do not
a%%ear to be heirs of the decedent. .either do they a%%ear to be %arties to the
intestate %roceedin/s. hird %ersons to 'hom the decedentDs assets had been
con0eyed may be cited to a%%ear in court and e5amined under oath as to ho' they
came into %ossession of the decedentDs assets. -n case of fraudulent con0eyances, a
se%arate action is necessary to reco0er these assets.
aAen in this li/ht, there is no reason 'hy the trial court should disallo' the
e5amination of the alle/ed transferees of the shares of stocAs. his is only for
%ur%oses of elicitin/ information or securin/ e0idence from %ersons sus%ected of
concealin/ or con0eyin/ some of the decedentDs %ro%erties to the %re1udice of
creditors. PetitionersD admission that these %ersons are the decedentDs assi/nees
does not automatically ne/ate concealment of the decedentDs assets on their %art.
he assi/nment mi/ht be simulated so as to %lace the shares beyond the reach of
creditors. -n case the shares are e0entually included in the estate, this in0entory is
merely %ro0isional and is not determinati0e of the issue of o'nershi%. " se%arate
action is necessary for determination of o'nershi% and reco0ery of %ossession.
<CLB 3, Section ,
:"R$" L4.&6, ?+*o? o< >oaNu+n 3ar0+a 3uerrero, 2et+t+oner-a22e--ee, vs.
L&454R 3"R!$" L4.&6, o22onent-a22e--ant.
-ll persons who come into possession of property belonging to any decedent are
liable therefor and accountable to the lawful administrator when the estate is finally
drawn into udicial administrationA and this responsibility extends to the restoration of
the fruits, increase, and accessions of such property as well as to the surrender of its
proceed , where it has been sold, or exchanged, and to compensation for its value
where it has been appropriated, converted or consumed"
9"!1S' (n 2arch 71, 1+01, )oa:uin Farcia Fuerrero died in the $ity of 2anila,
lea0in/ a sur0i0in/ 'ido', 2aria Lo%ez y $oe1ilo, and se0en children. 2any years
%rior to his death, the deceased had e5ecuted a ;ill in accordance 'ith the
re:uirements of article *+@ of the $i0il $ode then in force in these -slands. =o'e0er,
nothin/ 'as done for many years after his death looAin/ to the establishment of the
'ill and the 1udicial distribution of the estate thereunder. (n the contrary the %arties in
interest, the 'ido' and children of the deceased, desirin/ to Aee% the %ro%erty
to/ether, entered into an a/reement, dated &ebruary 15 1+02 'herein they
reco/nized their common o'nershi% of the %ro%erty and all a/reed not to seeA a
di0ision for t'o years from that date. (n 2ay ,, 1+0@, the %ro%erty bein/ still
undi0ided, 2aria Farcia Lo%ez (hi1a), sold her interest in her father's estate to her
coheirs for the sum of P17,13*.
(n 2arch 71, 1+05, another document 'as e5ecuted by the 'ido' and heirs, e5ce%t
2aria Farcia Lo%ez (hi1a), similar to that of &ebruary 15, 1+02, all a/ain reco/nizin/
the e5istence of the community estate and a/reein/ to %ost%one the di0ision for a
%eriod of fi0e years from 2arch 71, 1+05. (n 2arch 15, 1+11, -/nacio Farcia Lo%ez
sold his interest as heir to his coheirs for the sum of P2@,500.
(n 9ecember 15, 1+1@, the 'ido', 2aria Lo%ez y $oe1ilo, filed in $&- 2anila a
%etition for the %robate of her husband's 'ill, 'hich 'as duly %ro0ed and allo'ed by
the court, the a%%licant bein/ a%%ointed administratri5 of the decedentDs estate.
(n )anuary 22, 1+15, the 'ido' and all the heirs e5ce%t the t'o 'ho had %arted 'ith
their interest e5ecuted a document by 'hich they transferred to Leonor Lo%ez Farcia
certain %ro%erties described in the document in %ayment of her share in the undi0ided
%ro%ertyI and in return Leonor Lo%ez Farcia renounced her ri/ht to inter0ene in the
settlement of the estate of the testator, %articularly, the ri/ht of ob1ectin/ to the
accounts 'hich mi/ht be rendered for the %eriod of administration be/innin/ )anuary
1, 1+15. -t 'as, ho'e0er, also sti%ulated in said document that the 'ido' should
render an accountin/ of the administration of the %ro%erty from the death of the
testator, i.e from 2arch 71, 1+01, to 9ecember 71, 1+1@, the accounts to be
%resented in the course of the testamentary %roceedin/s, and that she should %ay to
Leonor Lo%ez Farcia 'hat the court mi/ht find to be still due her from the estate.
"ccordin/ly, on "%ril 2@, 1+15, the administratri5, 2aria Lo%ez, %resented her account
of her administration of the %ro%erty for the %eriod bet'een "%ril 1+01 and 9ecember
71, 1+1@.
Leonor Lo%ez Farcia filed certain ob1ections to the account thus %resented. he
attorney for the administratri5 tooA the %osition that the court 'as 'ithout 1urisdiction
to %ass u%on the account and 'as incom%etent to entertain the ob1ections. he trial
court acceded to his 0ie' and ordered the account to be returned to the
administratri5. &rom this order Leonor Farcia Lo%ez a%%ealed.
$SS%&' 'hether the court 'herein an administration is %endin/ has the %o'er to
re:uire a 1udicial administrator to account for acts done in the ca%acity of mana/er or
administrator
(&L)J ?es. he court has 1urisdiction and that it 'as error in the %resent case for the
trial court to refuse to consider the account in :uestion in connection 'ith the
e5ce%tions %resented thereto.
-t is of no moment that durin/ the %eriod co0ered by this accountin/ the accountable
%arty, no' formal administratri5, 'as actin/ as mana/er of the estate by a/reement
amon/ all the %arties then ha0in/ an interest in the estate. ;hen the estate of a
deceased %erson is brou/ht into 1udicial administration e0ery %erson ha0in/ any of the
%ro%erty of the decedent in his hands is re:uired to surrender it to the la'ful e5ecutor
or administrator, and any one 'ho may ha0e s:uandered assets of the estate or
con0erted the same to his o'n use is liable to ans'er for the 0alue thereof. here can
in the nature of thin/s be absolutely no e5ce%tion to this rule for it is inherent in the
/eneral 1urisdiction of the $ourt of &irst -nstance 6in all matters relatin/ to the
settlement of estates.6 (Sec. 5++, $ode $i0. Proc.) -t cannot be doubted that if the
%erson mana/in/ this estate durin/ the %eriod mentioned had been some other than
the %resent administratri5, it 'ould ha0e been the duty of the latter to re:uire such
%erson to account.
-t is true that section *,2 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, 'hich deals 'ith the annual
accountin/ by the administrator, contem%lates that he shall account only for such
%ro%erty as may come to his hands as administratorI but this has nothin/ to do 'ith
the initial accountin/ 'hich should be re:uired of an administrator 'ith res%ect to
%ro%erty 'hich may ha0e come to his hands as mana/er %rior to the issuance of
letters of administration. he accountin/, under such circumstances, is necessary to
determine 'hat assets %ertain to the estate and in this 'ay to establish the initial
res%onsibility of the administrator.
;e deem it, ho'e0er, %ro%er to add that if, as a%%ears to be the case, 2aria Lo%ez,
'ido', acted as mana/er of the %ro%erty in :uestion by consent of the heirs in
interest, 'ho ha0e ac:uiesced in her mana/ement and e5%ressly or tacitly conceded
to her a scale of remuneration different from or /reater than that 'hich the la' 'ould
allo' to a duly authorized administrator, said heirs 'ould necessarily be bound
thereby. -n other 'ords, the e5tent of the accountant's res%onsibility is, in the absence
of bad faith, to be disco0ered in the a/reement of the %arties in interest deducible from
their contract, in relation 'ith all the circumstances of the case. "s may readily be
discerned, a %erson called to account under conditions of this Aind mi/ht find himself
at a /reat disad0anta/e, if held ri/orously res%onsible 'ithout re/ard to the s%ecial
conditions under 'hich the administration 'as conducted. he failure of the heirs
durin/ so /reat a %eriod to attem%t to hold their mother accountable in court is, to say
the least, indicati0e of their ac:uiescence in the /eneral character of her
administrationI and the sti%ulation in the contract of )anuary 22, 1+15, that she should
be liable to account is not to be taAen as de%ri0in/ her of any defense, arisin/ from
a/reement or ac:uiescence of the %arties or from la%se of time, 'hich she 'ould be
other'ise entitled to inter%ose.
he heirs, other than the ob1ector, Leonor, are satisfied 'ith 'hat has been done. he
liability of the accountant is in any e0ent limited to the %ro%ortional interest of Leonor
in the balance found due from the administratri5 to the estate 'hen the %rocess of
accountin/ is finished.
<CLB ,3 Section 3
&%3&5 :"RS!("LL, as =u*+0+a- a*;+n+strator o< t/e estate o< Fa-ter 1oe/-,
*e0ease*, 2-a+nt+<<-a22e--ant, vs. !"RL "51(4L16, &1 "L., *e<en*ants. !"RL
"51(4L16, a22e--ant.
The manager of the oil mill who applies the proceeds of sales to the payment of debts
contracted in running the factory does not become liable for double the value of the
property sold, as for embe%%lement or alienation of property pertaining to the estate of
a deceased person under section 7'' of the .ode of .ivil 4rocedure" This section
contemplates an embe%%lement or alienation which causes the estate to lose the
property converted by the wrongdoerA and it is not applicable to the acts of a manger
of a going concern who applies the proceeds of the manufactured product to the
expenses incurred in running the business"
9"!1S' his action 'as instituted in the $&-82anila by Bu/en 2arschall, as
administrator of ;alter oehl, deceased, a/ainst $arl "ntholtz and ". 2urray U $o.,
Ltd., for the %ur%ose of reco0erin/ a %arcel of land in Santa "na, 2anila, 'ith the
buildin/s, im%ro0ements, and machinery thereon, consistin/ of an oil mill 'ith its
a%%urtenances, and to obtain a decree annullin/ the orrens title co0erin/ said land
and im%ro0ements, 'ith %ronouncement to the effect that said %ro%erty %ertains to the
estate of ;alter oehl, deceased, sub1ect to a certain mort/a/e thereon, and to
reco0er the 0alue of the reasonable use and occu%ation of said %ro%erty from (ctober
2, 1+2*, as 'ell as to obtain an accountin/ from the defendant $arl "ntholtz for the
use of said %ro%erty and the %roceeds of oil mill %roducts sold by him, 'ith further
a%%ro%riate /eneral relief. he defendants ans'ered 'ith a /eneral denial and cross8
com%laint 'herein.
oehl 'as the 2anila 2ana/er of #ehn 2eyer U $o. "ntholtz 'as a chemist and oil
technolo/ist. oehl o'ns a %arcel of land in Sta. "na, and in order to use the %ro%erty
in some %rofitable 'ay, oehl entered into an a/reement 'ith "ntholtz. he a/reement
bet'een them 'as that oehl 'ould furnish the ca%ital necessary for the business,
'hich 'as estimated at P25,000, and "ntholtz 'ould act as oehl's a/ent and man/er
at a salary of P500 %er month. oehl, bein/ then em%loyed by #ehn 2eyer, chose not
to use his name in his business 'ith "ntholtzI he instead allo'ed "ntholtz to o%erate
the business under "ntholtzDs o'n name. "ntholtz installed for oehl a factory for the
manufacture of coconut oil on the %ro%erty mentioned, and he %roceeded thereafter to
o%erate the concern in his o'n name. (n different dates in the early months of 1+2*
"ntholtz recei0ed from oehl the sum of P17,000 'hich 'as in0ested in the concern.
he business 'as a%%arently underca%italized, and it became necessary to borro'
money. oehl decided to establish the business in cor%orate from 'ith a ca%ital,
consistin/ of the land and buildin/, already re/istered in the name of oehl, and the
machinery, then bein/ used in the business by "ntholtz. "t this time "ntholtz
ha%%ened to be the o'ner and holder of all the certificates of stocA of a cor%oration
Ano'n as ". 2urray U $o., Ltd., a concern 'ithout ca%ital, 'hich had totally ceased to
function. -ts shares, therefore, 'ere no lon/er of any 0alue. ;ith the consent of
"ntholtz, oehl assumed %ossession of the documents relatin/ to this cor%oration 'ith
a 0ie' to re0i0in/ it as cor%orate o'ner of the oil %lant abo0e8mentioned. =a0in/
obtained %ossession of the certificates of stocA issued in the name of "ntholtz, oehl
marAed said shares as canceled and %re%ared a ne' certificate of stocA for @+*
shares in the name of his 'ife, )osefa oehl. &our other se0eral shares 'ere either
issued, or intended to be issued, in blanA, to four directors of the intended cor%oration,
but they 'ere endorsed and deli0ered to 2rs. oehl. -n order to start this old
cor%oration on its 'ay as a sol0ent concern, oehl transferred to it the %arcel of land
abo0e8mentioned, 'ith the factory and machinery established thereon. &or the
%ur%oses of this ste% the factory 'as 0alued at P70,000, and the machinery at
P20,000. hat oehl 'as the %rime mo0er and actor in these ste%s is clearly a%%arent
from the uncontradicted testimony of "ntholtz and documents introduced in e0idence
as e5hibits. oehl died before the rehabilitation of ". 2urray U $o., Ltd., 'as
com%leted, but a con0eyance 'as e5ecuted by oehl %lacin/ the land, 'ith
im%ro0ements, in the name of ". 2urray U $o., Ltd., and the orrens title to the
%ro%erty no' stands in the name of said com%any. 2ean'hile "ntholtz 'as o%eratin/
the oil mill under his contract 'ith oehl.
"fter oehl's death, or shortly %rior thereto, it 'as found that he 'as short in his
accounts 'ith #ehn, 2eyer U $o., =. 2i1., to the e5tent of about P150,000I and a
claim for a%%ro5imately this amount has been allo'ed by the committee on claims in
the estate of oehl in administration. here a%%ears to ha0e been only one other
creditor of his estate, 'hose claim is small in amount. "fter oehl's death the then
mana/er of #ehn, 2eyer U $o., =. 2i1., %rocured Bu/en 2arschall to be a%%ointed
administrator of the estate, and the %resent action 'as instituted by him to reco0er
%ossession of the oil mill %ro%erty abo0e8mentioned and to hold "ntholtz %ersonally
liable for certain %ersonal %ro%erty %ertainin/ to the oil mill and %roducts of the same
'hich ha0e been sold by "ntholtz in the continuation of his duties as man/er.
he %laintiff's case su%%oses that oehl and "ntholtz 'ere in collusion and that the
latter 'as co/nizant of the fact that the money 'hich oehl had %ut into the oil
business in Santa "na had been feloniously embezzled by oehl from his em%loyer.
"s a conse:uence of this su%%osed collusion, it is insisted for the %laintiff that "ntholtz
is liable for e0erythin/ 'hich oehl had taAen from #ehn, 2eyer U $o., =. 2i1., and
%laced in the oil mill business, as 'ell as for the %roceeds of the thin/s sold by
"ntholtz after the death of oehl. he trial court found, and 'e concur in this
conclusion, that there is no sufficient %roof of collusion bet'een "ntholtz and oehl in
the matter of the misa%%ro%riation of any of the funds of #ehn, 2eyer U $o., =. 2i1.
$SS%&' ;hether "ntholtz is liable for the %roceeds %roceeds of certain effects sold by
him after the death of oehl, as 'ell as the %roceeds of the out%ut of the mill 'hile
"ntholtz continued in the mana/ement.
(&L)' .o.
-n section ,11 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure it is declared that if any %erson, before
the /rantin/ of letters testamentary or of administration on the estate of a deceased
%erson, embezzles, or alienates, any of the effects of such deceased %erson, such
%erson shall be liable to an action in fa0or of the e5ecutor or administrator of such
estate for double the 0alue of the %ro%erty sold, embezzled, or alienated, to be
reco0ered for the benefit of the estate.
#ut this %ro0ision has reference %rimarily to funds that are lost by embezzlement or
alienation, and it cannot be understood as maAin/ the man/er of a /oin/ concern
liable for %roceeds of sales a%%lied by him to the %ro%er uses of the business, as
occurred in this case. he %roof sho's that the %ersonal %ro%erty other than the
%roducts of the mill, sold by "ntholtz in the manner mentioned, 'as sold 'ith the
consent of the mana/er of #ehn, 2eyer U $o., =. 2i1., and 'ith the consent of the
administrator of ;alter oehl, and the %roceeds of these sales, as 'ell as the
%roceeds of the %roducts of the mill, 'ere a%%lied by "ntholtz to the obli/ations
incurred by him in runnin/ the business, 'ithout the im%ro%er di0ersion of a sin/le
cent.
-t certainly 'ould ha0e been astonishin/ for oehl to ha0e communicated to his o'n
em%loyee the fact that the ca%ital ad0anced for the use in the oil mill business had
been abstracted by oehl from the coffers of #ehn, 2eyer U $(., =. 2i1. -t seems to
us that the sli/htest that oehl 'ould be %articularly careful not to %ut himself at the
mercy of his mana/er by re0ealin/ to him the fact that the ca%ital in0ested 'as bein/
'ron/fully obtained by oehlI and a re0ie' of the e0idence leads us to belie0e, as the
trial 1ud/e found, that "ntholtz 'as 'holly innocent of any /uilty %artici%ation in the
embezzlements committed by oehl.
(Fe *o not /ave t/e neIt <+ve 0ases yet be0ause t/ey ?ere ass+,ne* to :arNuez
but $ <or,ot /eJs taM+n, S2e02ro un*er >ust+0e )e LeonOtet)
!"RL4 (&R:4S$S$:"JS ."R1
."7$" vs. )& L" R4S"
&actsJ
he deceased Pablo Linart e -turralde named as e5ecutor &rancisco Franada e
-turralde. -n said 'ill $armen Linart y Pa0ia 'as made the only uni0ersal heir. ('in/
to the death of the testator, )ose de la <osa 'as substituted as e5ecutor and tooA
%ossession of the %ro%erty of the estate. <afaela Pa0ia, in her o'n behalf and as
/uardian of $armen, e5ecuted a %o'er of attorney - behalf of )ose de la <osa. )ose
de la <osa acce%ted the %o'er of attorney and %roceeded to administer the estate in
a careless manner resultin/ in loss and dama/e to $armen. Later )ose de la <osa
died lea0in/ as his only heirs #abiana and Salud de la <osa. #abiana and Salud
recei0ed and acce%ted from the estate of )ose the inheritance 'ithout benefit of
in0entory and recei0ed and di0ided amon/ themsel0es, as such heirs, all of the
estate. #abiana and Salud 'ere then sued by $armen throu/h <afaela to reco0er the
losses sustained by $armen due to )oseDs mismana/ement of the estate.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the filin/ of the suit a/ainst #abiana and Salud 'as %ro%er>
=eldJ
.o. -n accordance 'ith the %ro0isions of the aforesaid "ct .o. 1+0, it is understood
that testate or intestate succession is al'ays acce%ted 'ith the benefit of in0entory,
and the heirs, e0en after taAin/ %ossession of the estate of the deceased, do not
maAe themsel0es res%onsible for the debts of the deceased 'ith their o'n %ro%erty,
but solely 'ith that %ro%erty comin/ from the testate or intestate succession of the
deceased.
he $ode of $i0il Procedure no' in force maAes necessary the o%enin/ of a testate or
intestate succession immediately after the death of the %erson 'hose estate is to be
administered, the a%%ointment of an e5ecutor or administrator, the taAin/ of an
in0entory of the estate, and the a%%ointment of t'o or more commissioners for the
a%%raisal of the %ro%erties of the estate and decidin/ as to the claims a/ainst such
estate.
he e5tra1udicial di0ision of an estate amon/ heirs of le/al a/e 'ithout the
inter0ention of the courts 'ill taAe effect only in accordance 'ith the terms and
conditions %ro0ided in sections 5+* and 5+, of the $ode of $i0il Procedure.
Pursuant to the %ro0isions contained in Part -- of this code the only entity that can
la'fully re%resent a testate or intestate succession of a deceased %erson is the
e5ecutor or administrator a%%ointed by the court, char/ed to care for, maintain, and
administer the estate of the deceased.
he heir le/ally succeeds the deceased from 'hom he deri0es his ri/ht and title, but
only after the li:uidation of the estate, the %ayment of the debts of same, and the
ad1udication of the residue of the estate of the deceased, and in the meantime the
only %erson in char/e by la' to attend to all claims a/ainst the estate of the deceased
debtor is the e5ecutor or administrator a%%ointed by a com%etent court.
&rom the abo0e it a%%ears e0ident that 'hate0er may be the ri/ht of action on the %art
of <afaela Pa0ia and the minor, $armen Linart, the latter re%resented by the former as
/uardian, as to the obli/ations assumed by )ose, no' deceased, it must be
%rosecuted a/ainst the e5ecutor or administrator of the estate of said deceased )ose,
'hose e5ecutor or administrator is at this time the only re%resentati0e of the estate or
intestate succession of said deceased.
:"38"5%" vs. "E4L
&actsJ
(n "u/ust 2@, 1+1,, )ulio 2a/banua died intestate in the munici%ality of Pototan,
Pro0ince of -loilo. .o intestate %roceedin/s had been instituted until "%ril 1, 1+75,
'hen a %etition 'as filed in the $ourt of &irst -nstance of -loilo by one <aynalda
2a/banua, 'ho alle/ed to be an acAno'led/ed natural dau/hter of the deceased
)ulio 2a/banua, to/ether 'ith her husband, Se/undo #ernasol. "tty. "Aol 'as
a%%ointed administrator 'hile 9oromal 'as a%%ointed co8administrator. Fedan/ and
&lores 'ere a%%ointed as commissioners. Later, 2ario 2a/banua and his 'ife,
Priscila 2a/banua, filed 'ith the committee a claim a/ainst the deceased )ulio
2a/banua. he committee disallo'ed the claim, on the /round that , in accordance
'ith section @7 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, it had %rescribed. he $&- affirmed the
resolution on the /round of laches.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the ri/ht of the s%ouses to claim from the estate has %rescribed>
=eldJ
?es. -n Ledesma 0s. 2cLachlin, decided .o0ember 27, 1+73, this court a/ain
intimated that section *@2 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure authorizes a creditor to
institute an intestate %roceedin/ throu/h the a%%ointment of an administrator for the
%ur%ose of collectin/ his credit.
he s%ouses cannot reco0er u%on their claim, it a%%earin/ that more than ei/hteen
years had ela%sed after the death of their debtor and before the institution of the
latterDs intestate %roceedin/s.
L$6"RR"3" vs. "8")"
&actsJ
&rancisco $a%onon/ died in (ctober, 1+0*, o'in/ the %laintiffs(Lizarra/a) a sum of
money. =is 'ido', &elicisima "bada, 'as a%%ointed administratri5 of the estate,
commissioners to a%%raise the estate and to %ass on the claims a/ainst the estate
'ere duly a%%ointed, and %laintiffs %resented their claim 'hich 'as allo'ed by the
commissioners in the sum of P12,,37.,@. he administratri5 leased the hacienda to
=ilario Rayco for a term of years but after'ards she married Kicente "l0arez, one of
the defendants, and the lease 'as transferred to "l0arez by Rayco. Se0en years after
the death of $a%onon/, the %laintiffs herein filed a suit a/ainst "bada %ersonally and
as administratri5 of the estate of $a%onon/, alle/in/ that &rancisco $a%onon/ o'ed
the %laintiffs the sum of P*2,@7,.15. he /uardian of the minor children of &rancisco
$a%onon/ asAed %ermission of the court to inter0ene in that suit, and this bein/
/ranted, he denied the claim under oath, and alle/ed that the estate of &rancisco did
not o'e %laintiffs anythin/. Later, a com%romise a/reement 'as entered into bet'een
Lizarra/a on the one hand and the administratri5 and the /uardian on the other. -n
that a/reement %ro%erties of the estate 'ere mort/a/ed to secure the %ayment of the
debt. "s some installments 'ere not %aid %laintiffs had recei0ers a%%ointed to taAe
char/e of the %ro%erties mort/a/ed and defendants 'ere ousted from the %ro%erty
they 'ere occu%yin/.
-ssueJ
a) ;hether or not the P*3,000 can be considered an administration e5%ense>
b) ;hether or not the mort/a/e of %ro%erties belon/in/ to the estate to secure debts
of the estate 'as 0alid>
=eldJ
a) .o. he e5%enses of administration should be those necessary for the
mana/ement of the %ro%erty, for %rotectin/ it a/ainst destruction or deterioration, and
%ossibly for the %roduction of fruitsI but the sum e5%ended by an administrator of an
e5tensi0e administration of the estates of the decedent can not be considered
Ge5%enses of administration.E
b) .o. hat the estate /rants no %o'er to an administrator to borro' money u%on a
mort/a/e of the real estate of the decedent is not contro0erted. -ndeed, such an act
'ould be contrary to the %olicy and %ur%oses of the administration 'hich aims to close
u%, and not to continue an estate.
"lthou/h the mort/a/e 'as one made by the administrator and a%%ro0ed by the court,
still the a%%ro0al can not render 0alid the 0oid acts of an administrator.
34)4C vs. 4R&LL"54
&actsJ
&elisa Pan/ilinan, administratri5 of the estate of )ulio (rellno, e5ecuted a document in
fa0or of Fodoy /i0in/ the latter the o%tion to buy a dred/e for the consideration of
P1,000. he condition 'as that Fodoy 'as to %ay the 'hole %rice of the dred/e
'ithin t'enty days. he o%tion 'as /ranted in accordance 'ith the %o'er of attorney
e5ecuted by her coo'ners 'ho reser0ed the ri/ht to ratify 'hate0er sale mi/ht be
made, or o%tion /ranted by Pan/ilinan. he coo'ners did not ratify the o%tion
contract. #efore the e5%iration of t'enty days, the a%%ellee 'as ready to maAe
com%lete %ayment of the %rice, but &elisa failed to deli0er the dred/e. Fodoy then
sued &elisa and her coo'ners 'ho 'ere his brothers at the same time for the deli0ery
of the dred/e to him u%on %ayment of the sum of P+,000I to %ay him the sum of
P10,000 as dama/es, and to return to the %laintiff the sum of P1,000 should the
carryin/ out of the sale become im%ossible.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the sale of the dred/e 'hich the %arties Ane' belon/ed to the estate
of the deceased 'as 0alid>
=eldJ
.o. " sale and con0eyance by e5ecutors 'ithout an order of the %robate court, under
a 'ill de0isin/ %ro%erty to them in trust, but not authorizin/ any sale of the realty,
other'ise than by a direction to %ay the debts of the testator, is 0oid, and %asses no
title to the %urchasers. " sale by an administrator of the %ersonal %ro%erty of the
estate, 'ithout the authority of an order of court, or of a 'ill, or under an order of court
'hich is 0oid for 'ant of 1urisdiction, does not confer on the %urchaser a title 'hich is
a0ailable a/ainst a succeedin/ administrator.
&S1"1& 49 3":84" vs. 9L4R"56"
&actsJ
" claim 'as bein/ filed a/ainst the estate of Famboa by )aucian for P2,,20. he
commissioners allo'ed the claim and in their re%ort they said that this claim 'as
secured by a mort/a/e on real estate and e5%ressed an o%inion as to the %referential
ri/hts to 'hich this creditor and another mort/a/e creditor 'ould be entitled in the
distribution of the %roceeds of the sale. he administrator then %resented a %etition to
the court in 'hich he referred to the re%ort of the commissioners that it a%%eared that
some of the creditors 'ere mort/a/e creditors, and asAed that the court a%%oint a day
for a hearin/ u%on the :uestion as to the %reference 'hich these creditors en1oyed.
"fter this, the court, a%%arently 'ithout hearin/ any of the %arties interested, made an
order directin/ the administrator to %resent a motion asAin/ for an order directin/ the
sale of the mort/a/ed %ro%ertyI that the mort/a/e debt be %aid from the %roceeds of
the sale, and that 'hat remained be distributed amon/ the other creditors. his is one
of the orders a%%ealed from. Later the administrator %resented a %etition in
com%liance 'ith the order. he court then ordered, 'ithout any notice to the %arties
and 'ithout hearin/, that the mort/a/ed %ro%erty be sold and the %roceeds thereof to
be a%%lied to satisfy the debt due to )aucian. &loranza, another creditor, challen/ed
these orders.
-ssueJ
;hether or not these orders must be re0ersed>
=eldJ
?es. $ommissioners a%%ointed to hear e0idence 'ith res%ect to claims in
%roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate of a deceased %erson, ha0e no
1urisdiction to determine the :uestion of %riority in the %ayment of such claims.
" court, in the e5ercise of its %robate 1urisdiction, has no %o'er to allo' the sale of a
s%ecific %iece of real estate for the %ur%ose of %ayin/ off a mort/a/e lien thereon.
"n order made by a court, in %robate %roceedin/s, for the sale of %ro%erty belon/in/
to the estate of a deceased %erson, is 0oid 'hen no notice of the hearin/ u%on the
%etition for such sale is /i0en, as re:uired by section ,22 of the code of $i0il
Procedure.

(Fumabon)
(BisD)
(Pen/)
5"1!(&R vs. !"
366 S!R" 38#
S%ouses Fraciano del <osario and Fraciana Bs/uerra 'ere re/istered
o'ners of a %arcel of land located in 2anila and co0ered by ransfer $ertificate of
itle .o. 1133+. C%on the death of Fraciana, Fraciano, to/ether 'ith his si5 children,
entered into an e5tra1udicial settlement of Fraciana's estate ad1udicatin/ and di0idin/
amon/ themsel0es the real %ro%erty sub1ect of $ .o. 1133+. Cnder the a/reement,
Fraciano recei0ed 341@ share 'hile each of the si5 children recei0ed 141@ share of the
said %ro%erty.
Fraciano's share 'as further subdi0ided into t'o se%arate lots. Fraciano
sold the first lot to a third %erson but retained o'nershi% o0er the second lot. Fraciano
later on married herein %etitioner Patricia .atcher. 9urin/ their marria/e, Fraciano
sold the 2
nd
lot to his 'ife Patricia. Fraciano died lea0in/ his second 'ife Patricia and
his si5 children by his first marria/e, as heirs.
-n a com%laint filed before the <$ of 2anila, herein %ri0ate res%ondents
alle/ed that u%on Fraciano's death, %etitioner .atcher, throu/h the em%loyment of
fraud, misre%resentation and for/ery, ac:uired the 2
nd
lot by maAin/ it a%%ear that
Fraciano e5ecuted a 9eed of Sale in fa0or herein %etitioner.
"fter trial, the <$ of 2anila rendered a decision holdin/ that the deed of
sale e5ecuted by the late Fraciano del <osario in fa0or of Patricia .atcher is
%rohibited by la' and thus a com%lete nullity. -t also held that althou/h the deed of
sale cannot be re/arded as such or as a donation, it may ho'e0er be re/arded as an
e5tension of ad0ance inheritance of Patricia .atcher bein/ a com%ulsory heir of the
deceased.
(n a%%eal, the $" re0ersed and set aside the lo'er court's decision.
"//rie0ed, herein %etitioner seeAs refu/e under our %rotecti0e mantle throu/h the
e5%ediency of <ule @5 of the <ules of $ourt and assails the a%%ellate court's decision
6for bein/ contrary to la' and the facts of the case.6
-SSCBJ
;(. the <$, actin/ as a court of /eneral 1urisdiction in an action for
recon0eyance annulment of title 'ith dama/es, ad1udicate matters relatin/ to the
settlement of the estate of a deceased %erson %articularly on :uestions as to
ad0ancement of %ro%erty made by the decedent to any of the heirs>
=BL9J
.(, the <$ e5ceeded its 1urisdiction. he S$ concured 'ith the $" and
found no merit in the instant %etition. 2atters 'hich in0ol0e settlement and distribution
of the estate of the decedent fall 'ithin the e5clusi0e %ro0ince of the %robate court in
the e5ercise of its limited 1urisdiction.
hus, under Section 2, <ule +0 of the <ules of $ourt, :uestions as to
ad0ancement made or alle/ed to ha0e been made by the deceased to any heir may
be heard and determined by the 0ourt /av+n, =ur+s*+0t+on o< t/e estate
2ro0ee*+n,s; and the final order of the court thereon shall be bindin/ on the %erson
raisin/ the :uestions and on the heir.
;hile it may be true that the <ules used the 'ord 6may6, it is ne0ertheless
clear that the same %ro0ision contem%lates a %robate court 'hen it s%eaAs of the
6court ha0in/ 1urisdiction of the estate %roceedin/s6.
$orollarily, the <$ in the instant case, actin/ in its /eneral 1urisdiction, is
de0oid of authority to render an ad1udication and resol0e the issue of ad0ancement of
the real %ro%erty in fa0or of herein %etitioner .atcher, inasmuch as $i0il $ase .o.
@,10,5 for recon0eyance and annulment of title 'ith dama/es is not, to our mind, the
%ro%er 0ehicle to thresh out said :uestion. 2oreo0er, under the %resent
circumstances, the <$ of 2anila, #ranch 55 'as not %ro%erly constituted as a
%robate court so as to 0alidly %ass u%on the :uestion of ad0ancement made by the
decedent Fraciano 9el <osario to his 'ife, herein %etitioner .atcher.
he assailed decision of the $" 'as affirmed and the instant %etition 'as
dismissed for lacA of merit.
R%$6 vs. !"
2#2 S!R" #41
=ilario 2. <uiz e5ecuted a holo/ra%hic 'ill namin/ as his heirs his only son,
Bdmond <uiz, his ado%ted dau/hter, %ri0ate res%ondent 2aria Pilar <uiz 2ontes, and
his three /rand dau/hters 'ho 'ere all children of Bdmond <uiz. he testator
be:ueathed to his heirs substantial cash, %ersonal and real %ro%erties and named
Bdmond <uiz e5ecutor of his estate.
=ilario <uiz died. -mmediately thereafter, the cash com%onent of his estate
'as distributed amon/ Bdmond <uiz and %ri0ate res%ondents in accordance 'ith the
decedent's 'ill. &or unbeAno'n reasons, Bdmond, the named e5ecutor, did not taAe
any action for the %robate of his father's holo/ra%hic 'ill.
&our years after the testator's death, it 'as %ri0ate res%ondent 2aria Pilar
<uiz 2ontes 'ho filed before the <$ a %etition for the %robate and a%%ro0al of
=ilario <uiz's 'ill and for the issuance of letters testamentary to Bdmond <uiz.
Sur%risin/ly, Bdmond o%%osed the %etition on the /round that the 'ill 'as e5ecuted
under undue influence.
(ne of the %ro%erties of the estate 8 the house and lot at Kalle Kerde 8 'as
leased out by Bdmond <uiz to third %ersons. he %robate court ordered Bdmond to
de%osit 'ith the #ranch $lerA of $ourt the rental de%osit and %ayments totallin/
P5@0,000.00 re%resentin/ the one8year lease of the Kalle Kerde %ro%erty. -n
com%liance, Bdmond turned o0er the amount of P7@3,537.5*, re%resentin/ the
balance of the rent after deductin/ P1+1,@1*.1@ for re%air and maintenance e5%enses
on the estate.
Bdmond mo0ed for the release of P50,000.00 to %ay the real estate ta5es
on the real %ro%erties of the estate. he %robate court a%%ro0ed the release of
P,,,22 .00. Bdmond 'ithdre' his o%%osition to the %robate of the 'ill. $onse:uently,
the %robate court admitted the 'ill to %robate and ordered the issuance of letters
testamentary to Bdmond conditioned u%on the filin/ of a bond in the amount of
P50,000.00. he letters testamentary 'ere issued.
Petitioner estate Bstate of =ilario <uiz, 'ith Bdmond <uiz as e5ecutor, filed
an 6B58Parte 2otion for <elease of &unds.6 -t %rayed for the release of the rent
%ayments de%osited 'ith the #ranch $lerA of $ourt. he %robate court ordered the
release of the funds to Bdmond but only 6such amount as may be necessary to co0er
the e5%enses of administration and allo'ances for su%%ort6 of the testator's three
/randdau/hters sub1ect to collation and deductible from their share in the inheritance.
he court, ho'e0er, held in abeyance the release of the titles to res%ondent 2ones
and the three /randdau/hters until the la%se of si5 months from the date of first
%ublication of the notice to creditors.
Petitioner assailed this order before the $". &indin/ no /ra0e abuse of
discretion on the %art of res%ondent 1ud/e, the a%%ellate court dismissed the %etition
and sustained the %robate court's order in a decision. =ence, this %etition.
-SSCBJ
;(. the %robate court, after admittin/ the 'ill to %robate but before
%ayment of the estate's debts and obli/ations, has the authorityJ (1) to /rant an
allo'ance from the funds of the estate for the su%%ort of the testator's /randchildrenI
(2) to order the release of the titles to certain heirsI and (7) to /rant %ossession of all
%ro%erties of the estate to the e5ecutor of the 'ill.
=BL9J
Frandchildren are not entitled to %ro0isional su%%ort from the funds of the
decedent's estate. he la' clearly limits the allo'ance to 6'ido' and children6 and
does not e5tend it to the deceased's /randchildren, re/ardless of their minority or
inca%acity. -t 'as error, therefore, for the a%%ellate court to sustain the %robate court's
order /rantin/ an allo'ance to the /randchildren of the testator %endin/ settlement of
his estate.
<es%ondent courts also erred 'hen they ordered the release of the titles of
the be:ueathed %ro%erties to %ri0ate res%ondents si5 months after the date of first
%ublication of notice to creditors.
"nd <ule +0 %ro0ides thatJ
6Sec. 1. ;hen order for distribution of residue made. 8 ;hen the debts, funeral
char/es, and e5%enses of administration, the allo'ance to the 'ido', and inheritance
ta5, if any, char/eable to the estate in accordance 'ith la', ha0e been %aid, the court,
on the a%%lication of the e5ecutor or administrator, or of a %erson interested in the
estate, and after hearin/ u%on notice, shall assi/n the residue of the estate to the
%ersons entitled to the same, namin/ them and the %ro%ortions, or %arts, to 'hich
each is entitled, and such %ersons may demand and reco0er their res%ecti0e shares
from the e5ecutor or administrator, or any other %erson ha0in/ the same in his
%ossession. -f there is a contro0ersy before the court as to 'ho are the la'ful heirs of
the deceased %erson or as to the distributi0e shares to 'hich each %erson is entitled
under the la', the contro0ersy shall be heard and decided as in ordinary cases.
.o distribution shall be allo'ed until the %ayment of the obli/ations abo0e8
mentioned has been made or %ro0ided for, unless the distributees, or any of them,
/i0e a bond, in a sum to be fi5ed by the court, conditioned for the %ayment of said
obli/ations 'ithin such time as the court directs.6
-n the case at bar, the %robate court ordered the release of the titles to the
Kalle Kerde %ro%erty and the #lue <id/e a%artments to the %ri0ate res%ondents after
the la%se of si5 months from the date of first %ublication of the notice to creditors. he
:uestioned order s%eaAs of 6notice6 to creditors, not %ayment of debts and obli/ations.
=ilario <uiz alle/edly left no debts 'hen he died but the ta5es on his estate had not
hitherto been %aid, much less ascertained. he estate ta5 is one of those obli/ations
that must be %aid before distribution of the estate.
-f not yet %aid, the rule re:uires that the distributees %ost a bond or maAe
such %ro0isions as to meet the said ta5 obli/ation in %ro%ortion to their res%ecti0e
shares in the inheritance. .otably, at the time the order 'as issued the %ro%erties of
the estate had not yet been in0entoried and a%%raised.
347&R5:&51 49 1(& ..$. vs. .":$51%"5
## ./+- 13
his is an a%%eal taAen by the Fo0ernment of the Phili%%ine -slands from
the 1ud/ment of the $ourt of &irst. -nstance of 2anila dismissin/ its com%laint and
absol0in/ the defendants, 'ithout costs.
&lorentino Pamintuan, re%resented by ). K. <amirez or his attorney8in8fact
char/ed 'ith the administration of his %ro%erty, filed income8ta5 return for the year
1+1+, %ayin/ the amount of P*,2.++ on the basis of said return, and the additional
sum of P151.01 as a result of a subse:uent assessment recei0ed from the $ollector
of -nternal <e0enue.
&lorentino Pamintuan died lea0in/ the defendants herein as his heirs.
-ntestate %roceedin/s 'ere instituted in the $ourt of &irst -nstance of 2anila he
defendants herein inherited from the deceased &lorentino Pamintuan in the follo'in/
%ro%ortionsJ omasa Pamintuan inherited 0.05,1 %er cent of the decedent's estate
and the other defendants 0.0,3@ %er cent each accordin/ to the %artition a%%ro0ed by
the court in ci0il case .o. 2,+@3.
9urin/ the %endency of the intestate %roceedin/s, the administrator filed
income8ta5 returns for the estate of the deceased corres%ondin/ to the years 1+25
and 1+2*.
Subse:uent to the distribution of the decedents's estate to the defendants
herein, the %laintiff disco0ered the fact that the deceased &lorentino &amintuan has
not %aid the amount of four hundred and si5ty8t'o %esos (P@*2) as additional income
ta5 and surchar/e for the calendar year 1+1+
-SSCBJ
;(. the defendants are liable>
=BL9J
?BS, they are liable. he administration %roceedin/s of the late &lorentino
Pamintuan ha0in/ been closed, and his estate distributed amon/ his heirs, the
defendants herein, the latter are res%onsible for the %ayment of the income ta5 here in
:uestion in %ro%ortion to the share of each in said estate
=eirs are not re:uired to res%ond 'ith their o'n %ro%erty for the debts of
their deceased ancestors. #ut e0en after the %artition of an estate, heirs and
distributees are liable indi0idually for the %ayment of all la'ful outstandin/ claims
a/ainst the estate in %ro%ortion to the amount or 0alue of the %ro%erty they ha0e
res%ecti0ely recei0ed from the estate. he hereditary %ro%erty consists only of that
%art 'hich remains after the settlement of all la'ful claims a/ainst the estate, for the
settlement of 'hich the entire estate is first liable. he heirs cannot, by any act of their
o'n or by a/reement amon/ themsel0es, reduce the creditors' security for the
%ayment of their claims.
;herefore, let the defendants %ay the %laintiff the sum of P@*2, )ud/ment
re0ersed.
7&R" vs. 5"7"RR4
9 S!R" 408 (19)
&"$SJ
his is a %etition for certiorari, %rohibition and mandamus filed by #-< $ommissioner
Kera a/ainst $&- )ud/e .a0arro in relation to the 7 orders issued by .a0arro in the
S%ecial Proceedin/ 6-n the 2atter of the estate Bstate of Blsie 2. Faches 8
#ien0enido an, B5ecutor,6 alle/edly issued in F"9LB).
Blsie Faches died 'ithout any issue. -n her 'ill, she made se0eral dis%ositions to the
follo'in/ %ersonsJ her sister, dri0er, la0andero, and the balance of the estate after all
the dis%ositions is to be /i0en, in e:ual share to Bribal, the
cooA4caretaAer4com%anion4dri0er, and "banto, the s%ecial
nurse4com%anion4secretary4cooA of Faches. )ud/e an filed a %etition for the %robate
of the 'ill. =e 'as a%%ointed by the court as the e5ecutor, 'ithout a bond.
he la'yer of Bribal and "banto, and )ud/e an filed a %etition for authority to maAe
ad0ance inheritance, allo'ances and fees to the heirs and le/atees instituted in the
'ill, as 'ell as to the la'yers in0ol0ed in the %roceedin/, claimin/ that the estate is
0ery li:uid, thus the /o0ernment 'ill be am%ly %rotected des%ite the ad0ance
%ayments %rayed for. )ud/e .a0arro /ranted the %etition. he #-< $ommissioner filed
a %etition for the re0ocation of the orders of the %robate court allo'in/ for the said
ad0ance %ayments and for the a%%ointment of a co8administrator to re%resent the
/o0ernment. -t seems that the court denied this %etition.
hereafter, )ud/e an submitted a final accountin/ and %ro1ect of %artition to the
%robate court. )ud/e .a0arro a%%ro0ed the same, on the condition that Bribal and
"banto shall be res%onsible for all the ta5es 'hich may be due the /o0ernment arisin/
from the transactions in0ol0in/ the estate, and #auer, FachesD sister in the CS to
'hom she left all her %ro%erties in the CS, shall be res%onsible for all the CS ta5es
%ertainin/ to her share in the estate.
he $ommissioner issued 'arrants of /arnishment a/ainst the funds of the estate in
P.#, (#2 and P#$. C%on motion of the la'yer of Bribal and "banto, the %robate
court ordered for the liftin/ of the said 'arrants.
he #-< $ommissioner filed this %resent %etition, claimin/ that the 1ud/e committed
F"9LB) in issuin/ the orders because the distributi0e shares of an heir can only be
%aid after the full %ayment of the death ta5es, and that as %ro0ided by <ule +0 Sec. 1,
'hile a %artial distribution of the estate may be allo'ed, a bond must be filed by the
distributees to secure the %ayment of transfer ta5es.
)ud/e an, the e5ecutor, claimed that the estate has sufficient assets 'ith 'hich to
%ay the ta5es bein/ claimed by the /o0ernment.
-SSCBJ
;(. )C9FB ."K"<<( $(22-B9 F"9LB) -. -SSC-.F =B (<9B<S
"LL(;-.F &(< =B "9K".$B P"?2B.S>
S=(CL9 =B =B<B-. <BSP(.9B. =B-<S #B <B!C-<B9 ( P"? &-<S =B
-.=B<-".$B "N #B&(<B =B P<(#"B $(C< 2"? "C=(<-RB =B
9BL-KB<? (& =B =B<B9-"<? S="<B PB<"-.-.F ( B"$= (& =B2>
=BL9J
S$ held that )ud/e .a0arro committed F"9LB) 'hen he allo'ed for the said
ad0ance %ayments. <ule +0 Sec.1 %ro0ides that 6.o distribution shall be allo'ed until
the %ayment of the obli/ations abo0e mentioned has been made or %ro0ided for,
unless the distributees, or any of them, /i0e a bond, in a sum to be fi5ed by the court,
conditioned for the %ayment of said obli/ations 'ithin such time as the court directs.6
Cnder the %ro0isions of the afore:uoted <ule, the distribution of a decedent's assets
may only be ordered under any of the follo'in/ three circumstances, namely, (1) 'hen
the inheritance ta5, amon/ others, is %aidI (2) 'hen a sufficient bond is /i0en to meet
the %ayment of the inheritance ta5 and all do other obli/ations of the nature
enumerated in the abo0e8cited %ro0isionI or (7) 'hen the %ayment of the said ta5 and
all the other obli/ations mentioned in the said <ule has been %ro0ided for.
.one of these three cases, insofar as the satisfaction of the inheritance ta5 due from
the estate a concerned, 'ere %resent 'hen the :uestioned orders 'ere issued in the
case at bar.
"lthou/h the a%%ro0al of the ad0ance %ayments 'as on the condition that the ta5es
'ill be taAen cared of by the heirs, there 'as no %roof, other than the statement of the
counsel of the heirs that the said claims of the /o0ernment 'as ade:uately %ro0ided
for. he %robate court should ha0e checAed first the nature and condition of the assets
of the estate and its ade:uacy in satisfyin/ the claims of the /o0ernment. here is
also no e0idence that a sufficient bond 'as filed to meet the ta5 obli/ations of the
estate.
.e0ertheless, the issue in this case had been rendered academic by the su%er0enin/
e0ents. "%%arently, the counsel for Bribal and "banto made a com%romise %ayment
for the settlement of the deficiency estate ta5es. he #-< duly acce%ted and a%%ro0ed
the said com%romise %ayment.
S"L7")4R vs. S1". :"R$"
20 S!R" 603
Se0en %arcels of titled land and t'o %arcels of untitled land, situated in
#i/aa, #ulacan, 'ere o'ned by $elestino Sal0ador. =e e5ecuted a deed of sale o0er
them in fa0or of the s%ouses "lfonso Sal0ador and "natolia =alili. "lle/in/ that the
sale 'as 0oid for lacA of consideration, he filed a/ainst said 0endees, a suit for
recon0eyance of said %arcels of land.
$elestino Sal0ador died, testate. "s his alle/ed heirs, 21 %ersons
substituted as %laintiffs in the action for recon0eyance. he $ourt of "%%eals affirmed
the recon0eyance 1ud/ment, 'ith the correction that recon0eyance be in fa0or of the
21 heirs substituted as %laintiffs therein.
"bout three years later, one of the %arcels of land in0ol0ed, Lot *, 'as sold
so that 'ith its %roceeds debtors 'ho filed claims may be %aid. he 21 substituted
heirs filed 'ith the S$ the %resent s%ecial ci0il action for certiorari 'ith %reliminary
in1unction to assail the order to %ay the debts of the estate 'ith the P@1,13@.00
%roceeds of the sale of Lot *.

-SSCBJ
;(. the %arcels of land and the %roceeds of the sale of one of them,
%ro%erties of the estate or not>
=BL9J
?BS, the %arcels of land form %art of the estate. -t is a settled %oint of la'
that the ri/ht of heirs to s%ecific distributi0e shares of inheritance does not become
finally determinable until all the debts of the estate are %aid. Cntil then, in the face of
said claims, their ri/hts cannot be enforced, are inchoate, and sub1ect to the e5istence
of a residue after %ayment of the debts
Petitioners do not :uestion the e5istence of the debts abo0ementioned.
hey only contend that the %ro%erties in0ol0ed ha0in/ been ordered by final 1ud/ment
recon0eyed to them, not to the estate, the same are not %ro%erties of the estate but
their o'n, and thus, not liable for debts of the estate.
Said contention is self8refutin/. Petitioners rely for their ri/hts on their
alle/ed character as heirs of $elestinoI as such, they 'ere substituted in the
recon0eyance caseI the recon0eyance to them 'as recon0eyance to them as heirs of
$elestino Sal0ador. -t follo's that the %ro%erties they claim are, e0en by their o'n
reasonin/, %art of $elestino's estate. heir ri/ht thereto as alle/edly his heirs 'ould
arise only if said %arcels of land are %art of the estate of $elestino, not other'ise.
heir ha0in/ recei0ed the same, therefore, in the recon0eyance action, 'as %erforce
in trust for the estate, sub1ect to its obli/ations. hey cannot distribute said %ro%erties
amon/ themsel0es as substituted heirs 'ithout the debts of the estate bein/ first
satisfied.
(#or1aDs)
<ule +0, Sections 187
Lo2ez v. 4-bes, 1# ./+- #40
&actsJ
Lo%ez filed a ci0il case in court for the %ossession of a %arcel of land a/ainst (lbes,
the e5ecutor of the estate of the deceased 2artina Lo%ez based on the deed of
donation the latter e5ecuted 'hich the formed acce%ted on the same date. 9urin/ the
deceased lifetime, she e5ecuted a deed donated of the sub1ect %arcel of land in fa0or
of <icardo Lo%ez 'hich the latter acce%ted on the same date. 2artina Lo%ez 'as
informed of the acce%tance. (lbes, the e5ecutor, claimed to ha0e ri/hts of o'nershi%
and %ossession to the aforementioned %arcel of land on the /round that the %arcel of
land still belon/ to the estate of 2artina Lo%ez and 'as then in char/e of a trustee of
the e5ecutor and the %laintiff <icardo Lo%ez, and of the order of the court. (lbes filed
a demurrer. he lo'er court sustained the demurrer.
-ssue(s)J 1) ;hether the sub1ect %arcel of land still belon/ed to the estate of the
deceased>
2.) ;hether a demurrer challen/in/ the 0alidity of a donation be filed in a %robate
%roceedin/>
=eldJ
1) .o. " thin/ donated is no lon/er the %ro%erty of the deceased donor, nor
does it form %art of the hereditary estate, but belon/s to the donee until by
e5ecutory 1ud/ment the donation be declared null and irre/ular.
2) .o. !uestions arisin/ to the nullity or irre/ular nature of a donation, and
'hich affect its 0alidity and force, or some e5cess 'hich may re:uire
reduction, must be ar/ued and decided in accordance 'ith la' at a re/ular
trial and by a final 1ud/ment, and not by a rulin/ u%on a demurrer.
)e >esus v. )aza, S!R" 1#2
&actsJ
Petitioners %ray for certiorari and mandamus for the return of %ossession of t'o %arcel
of lands. Petitioners are testamentary heirs of the deceased Fa0ino de )esus. "
%ro1ect of %artition 'as a%%ro0ed by the court. "fter learnin/ of the sale, the
%etitioners instituted an action for le/al redem%tion.
-ssue(s)J 1) 'hether or not the res%ondent 1ud/e, %residin/ the %robate %roceedin/s,
had 1urisdiction to order the deli0ery of the %ossession of the aforesaid %arcels of land
'ithin the same estate %roceedin/ and not in an inde%endent ordinary action>
2) 'hether the %urchaser has a ri/ht of %ossession o0er the %ro%erty>
7) 'hether the %etitioners ha0e a ri/ht of redem%tion>
=eldJ
1) ?es. he %robate court has 1urisdiction, 'ithin the testate %roceedin/, to
order the deli0ery of the %ossession of a %ortion of the inheritance to the
%erson 'ho has bou/ht it from the heirs 'ithin the same estate %roceedin/
u%on %etition of the buyer and notice to the other interested %arties.
2) ?es. he ri/ht of the %urchaser is absolute until and unless resol0ed by the
timely and 0alid e5ercise of the ri/ht of redem%tion.
7) he sale tooA %lace after the a%%ro0al of the %robate court of the order of
%artition. #ut e0en su%%osin/ su%%osin/ that the a%%ro0al of the sale 'as
made after the sale, still the a%%ro0al related bacA to the date of the %ro1ect
of %artition.
Santos v. "ranzanso, 116 S!R" 1
&actsJ
his is a %etition to challen/e the le/ality of the decree of ado%tion in fa0or of Paulina
Santos and "urora Santos on the /rounds that the a%%lication for ado%tion 'as not
si/ned by both ado%tin/ %arents and by natural %arentsI and the 1ud/ment 'as
%rocured throu/h and by means of fraud.
-ssueJ
1) ;hether the 0alidity if the ado%tion could be assailed collaterally in intestate
%roceedin/s>
2) ;hether the $&- has 1urisdiction o0er the %etition>
=eldJ
1) .o. he 0alidity of the ado%tion cannot be assailed collaterally in an
intestate %roceedin/s.
2) .o. B5clusi0e ori/inal 1urisdiction o0er ado%tion and annulment of ado%tion
cases lies 'ith the )u0enile and 9omestic <elations $ourt ()9<$) and not
the $ourt of &irst -nstance.
5,o 1/e (ua v. !/un, E+at (ua, 9 S!R" 113
&actsJ
his is an a%%eal from the order of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of <izal a%%ointin/
$hun/ Liat =ua as administrator of the estate of the deceased $hun/ Liu.
./o he =ua, claimin/ to be the s%ouse of the deceased, filed a %etition to be
a%%ointed administrati5 of the estate of the aforementioned deceased. he %etition
'as o%%osed by the children of the deceased claimin/ that ./o =ua is morally and
%hysically unfit to e5ecute the duties of the trust as administrati5, and that the she and
the deceased %rocured an absolute di0orce in ai'an. he lo'er court found that ./o
=ua and the deceased 'ere 0alidly di0orced in ai%ei. he court issued an order
a%%ointin/ $hun/ Liat =ua as administrator instead.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the lo'er court erred in %assin/ u%on the 0alidity of the di0orce
obtained by ./o =ua and the deceased and u%on the filiation of the o%%ositors>
=eldJ
.o. -t is 'ell settled that the declaration of heirs shall only taAe %lace after all the
debts, e5%enses and ta5es ha0e been %aid. " cursory readin/ of the %ertinent section
discloses that 'hat the court is en1oined from doin/ is the assi/nment or distribution of
the residue of the deceasedDs estate before the abo0e8mentioned obli/ations
char/eable to the estate are first %aid. .o'here from the said section may it be
inferred that the court cannot maAe a declaration of heirs %rior to the satisfaction of
these obli/ations. -t is to be noted, ho'e0er, that the court in maAin/ the a%%ointment
of the administrator did not %ur%ort to maAe a declaration of heirs.
>+;o,a-on v. 8e-;onte, 84 ./+- #4#
&actsJ
his is an a%%eal from the order of $ourt of &irst -nstane of .e/ros (ccidental
a%%ointin/ "%olonia )imo/a8on as administrati5 of the estate of 2arcelino #elmonte,
and failin/ to ad1ud/e the mo0ants8a%%ellants )ulita and Cl%iano #elmonte to be
acAno'led/ed natural children of 2arceio #elmonte and to a%%oint )ulita #elmonte as
administrati5 of the %ro%erties ac:uired by the deceased before his marria/e to
"%olonio )imo/a8on.
-ssueJ ;hether or not the lo'er court erred in not maAin/ an ad1udication to the effect
that they are acAno'led/ed natural children of the deceased>
=eldJ
he %etition does not hold merit. &irst, the matter so far taAen u% by the lo'er court
'as limited to the a%%ointment of the 1udicial administrati5. -n other 'ords, 'hile no
1urisdiction 'as made on the status of the a%%ellants, this fact does not %reclude
future action on the %oint. "nd second, 'hile the 1urisdiction of the %robate court
includes the %o'er to entertain the acAno'led/ed by the decedent, it is only after, and
not before, the %ayment of all debts, funeral char/es, e5%enses of administration,
allo'ance to the 'ido', and inheritance ta5 shall ha0e been effected that the court
should maAe a declaration of heirs or of such %ersons as are entitled by la' to the
residue.

(rachelleDs)
.($L$..$5& S"7$53S 8"5E, %etitioner, 0s. (45. 3R&34R$4 1. L"51$5, Presidin/
)ud/e, $ourt of &irst -nstance of 2anila, #ranch K--, and !"5)$)4 R":4S,
res%ondents
VF.<. .o. L877+2+. Se%tember 2, 1+37.W
&actsJ
-n0ol0ed in this case is a du%le58a%artment house on a lot situated at San 9ie/o
Street, Sam%aloc, 2anila, and o'ned by the s%ouses &ilomeno and Socorro abli/an.
he du%le58a%artment house 'as built for the s%ouses by %ri0ate res%ondent $andido
<amos, a duly licensed architect and buildin/ contractor, at a total cost of P72,+2,.00.
he s%ouses %aid %ri0ate res%ondent the sum of P,,17+.00 only. =ence, the latter
used his o'n money, P25,,33.50 in all, to finish the construction of the du%le58
a%artment. Later on, the s%ouses /ot a loan from Phili%%ine Sa0in/s #anA (PS#) and
they mort/a/ed the said a%artment. "t the time the mort/a/es 'ere re/istered in
1+*,, the titles 'ere clean from any encumbrance. he s%ouses failed to %ay. -n 1+*+,
the banA foreclosed the %ro%erty. =o'e0er, %rior to that, year 1+*3, the architect filed
a collection suit a/ainst the s%ouses. " 1ud/ment 'as rendered in fa0or of the
architect. -n 1+,0, the banA consolidated o'nershi%.
"s the s%ouses did not ha0e any %ro%erties to satisfy the 1ud/ment in $i0il $ase .o.
*+223, the %ri0ate res%ondent addressed a letter to the %etitioner for the deli0ery to
him (%ri0ate res%ondent) of his %ro8rata share in the 0alue of the du%le58a%artment in
accordance 'ith "rticle 22@2 of the $i0il $ode. he %etitioner refused to %ay the %ro8
rata 0alue %rom%tin/ the %ri0ate res%ondent to file the instant action. "s earlier stated,
a decision 'as rendered in fa0or of the %ri0ate res%ondent.
he %arties are a/reed that the only issue is 'hether or not the %ri0ate res%ondent is
entitled to claim a %ro8rata share in the 0alue of the %ro%erty in :uestion.
he banA states that the %roceedin/ before the court could not a%%ly "rticle 22@2
because in order to do so, there must first be foreclosure %roceedin/s or other
insol0ency %roceedin/s. $onse:uently, it is ar/ued that %ri0ate res%ondent's un%aid
contractor's claim did not ac:uire the character of a statutory lien e:ual to the
%etitioner's re/istered mort/a/e.
C%on the other hand, %ri0ate res%ondent <amos maintains that the %roceedin/s had
before the court belo' can :ualify as a /eneral li:uidation of the estate of the s%ouses
abli/an because the only e5istin/ %ro%erty of said s%ouses is the %ro%erty sub1ect
matter of this liti/ation.
-J ;(. a collection suit, 'ith only 2 creditors, can be :ualified as a settlement of a
decedentDs estate thereby allo'in/ the a%%lication of "rt 22@2>
=J
he %roceedin/s in the court belo' do not %artaAe of the nature of the
insol0ency %roceedin/s or settlement of a decedent's estate. he action filed by
<amos 'as only to collect the un%aid cost of the construction of the du%le5 a%artment.
-t is far from bein/ a /eneral li:uidation of the estate of the abli/an s%ouses.
-nsol0ency %roceedin/s and settlement of a decedent's estate are both
%roceedin/s in rem 'hich are bindin/ a/ainst the 'hole 'orld. "ll %ersons ha0in/
interest in the sub1ect matter in0ol0ed, 'hether they 'ere notified or not, are e:ually
bound. $onse:uently, a li:uidation of similar im%ort or 6other e:ui0alent /eneral
li:uidation' must also necessarily be a %roceedin/ in rem so that all interested %ersons
'hether Ano'n to the %arties or not may be bound by such %roceedin/.
-n the case at bar, althou/h the lo'er court found that 6there 'ere no Ano'n creditors
other than the %laintiff and the defendant herein6, this can not be conclusi0e. -t 'ill not
bar other creditors in the e0ent they sho' u% and %resent their claims a/ainst the
%etitioner banA, claimin/ that they also ha0e %referred liens a/ainst the %ro%erty
in0ol0ed. $onse:uently, ransfer $ertificate of itle .o. 1013*@ issued in fa0or of the
banA 'hich is su%%osed to be indefeasible 'ould remain constantly unstable and
:uestionable. Such could not ha0e been the intention of "rticle 22@7 of the $i0il $ode
althou/h it considers claims and credits under "rticle 22@2 as statutory liens.
<es%ondent <amos admitted in the %artial sti%ulation of facts submitted by
both %arties that at the time of the loans to the s%ouses, the %etitioner's banA had no
actual or constructi0e Ano'led/e of any lien a/ainst the %ro%erty in :uestion. he
du%le5 a%artment house 'as built for P72,+2,.00. he s%ouses abli/an borro'ed
P75,000.00 for the construction of the a%artment house. he banA could not ha0e
Ano'n of any contractor's lien because, as far as it 'as concerned, it financed the
entire construction e0en if the stated %ur%ose of the loans 'as only to 6com%lete6 the
construction.
Since the action filed by the %ri0ate res%ondent is not one 'hich can be considered as
6e:ui0alent /eneral li:uidation6 ha0in/ the same im%ort as an insol0ency or settlement
of the decedent's estate %roceedin/, the 'ell established %rinci%le must be a%%lied
that a %urchaser in /ood faith and for 0alue taAes re/istered land free from liens and
encumbrances other than statutory liens and those recorded in the $ertificate of itle.
-t is an admitted fact that at the time the deeds of real estate mort/a/e in fa0or of the
%etitioner banA 'ere constituted, the transfer certificate of title of the s%ouses abli/an
'as free from any recorded lien and encumbrances, so that the only re/istered liens
in the title 'ere deeds in fa0or of the %etitioner.
:"R1$5" R":4S, &1 "L., %laintiffs8a%%ellants,
0s.
!"R$)") 4R1%6"R, &1 "L., defendants8a%%ellants.
(3.R. 5o. L-3299 "u,ust 29, 19#1)
&actsJ
Percy ". =ill, an "merican and retired officer of the Phili%%ine $onstabulary, cohabited
'ith 2artina <amos in 2unoz, then a barrio of San )uan de Fuimba, %ro0ince of
.ue0a Bci1a, from 1+05 to 1+1@ and had 'ith her si5 children, t'o of 'hom are
<ichard =ill and 2ar0in =ill and the others died in infancy. =e started ac:uirin/ lands
by %urchase or homestead and im%ro0in/ and culti0atin/ them until at the time of his
death on )uly 27, 1+7,, his holdin/s 'ere 'orth o0er P100,000.
-n 1+1@, Percy ". =ill canonically married an "merican 'oman by the name of =elen
Li0in/stone and of that union three children 'ere born, all of 'hom no' reside in the
Cnited States. =elen Li0in/stone died in 1+22, and in 1+2@, =ill married $aridad
(rtuzar by 'hom he had one dau/hter. -t is $aridad (rtuzar and all the children had
by her and =elen Li0in/stone. "nother defendant in the case 'as 2a5imo #ustos,
'ho %urchased the %ro%erty sold by the heirs of =ill.
(n Se%tember 7, 1+7,, %roceedin/s for the settlement of Percy ". =ill's estate 'ere
commenced and $aridad (rtuzar 'as a%%ointed administratri5. 9urin/ the -ntestate
%roceedin/s, 2ar0in and <ichard =ill inter0ened claimin/ to be the deceasedDs
children. he court conducted a hearin/ as to the ri/hts of the t'o but declared in
order that they are not ri/htful heirs of =ill, thereby e5cludin/ them from %artici%atin/
in the distribution of the estate. 2ar0in/ and <ichard failed to a%%eal the dedcision.
#y order of the court, the administratri5 on "%ril 2, 1+@0 submitted an accountin/ and
a %ro1ect of %artition, and both of these ha0in/ been a%%ro0ed, distribution of the
estate 'as made accordin/ly and the estate 'as closed. (n 2arch 2,, 1+@,, the
declared heirs and distributes ($aridad (rtuzar, her dau/hter and the deceased's
children by =elen Li0in/stone) sold si5 tracts of land left by =ill to 2a5imo #ustos for
P120,000, this bein/ the sale 'hich the trial court 'ould annul.
Si5 years after the %artition, 2artina came before the $&- claimin/ that she 'as the
la'ful 'ife and her children 'ere the le/itimate Aids of the deceased. he $&- decided
a/ainst her because no certificate of marria/e 'as %roduced and no record 'as made
in the ci0il re/istry. he court also found out that durin/ the duration of the alle/ed
marria/e, the deceased came to 2artina and introduced another 'ife. #ecause of
this, 2artina asAed the deceased to ha0e another house constructed for her ri/ht in
front of their old house. he court said that this act of a la'ful 'ife is unbelie0able
because 'hy 'ould she instantly /i0e u% her ri/ht to use the house that the t'o of
them built to/ether.
-J ;(. 2artina, after si5 years could still raise the issues already ans'ered by the
$&- in the s%ecial %roceedin/s>
=eldJ
"s to res adudicata. -t has been seen that Percy " =ill died on )uly 27, 1+7,, after
'hich, on Se%tember 7 of the same year, intestate %roceedin/s for the settlement of
his estate ($i0il $ode .o. ,*3*) 'ere be/un. "nd as also stated, the record of these
%roceedin/s ha0e disa%%eared from the files of the court, ho'e0er, the court 6docAet
for s%ecial %roceedin/s cases6 'as not lost or destroyed. he entries on %a/es 20@,
205 and 20, of this booA, %ieced to/ether, re0eal these factsJ -n Percy ". =ill's
intestate %roceedin/s, <ichard and 2ar0in =ill inter0ened, or sou/ht to inter0ene, on
the alle/ation that they 'ere the deceased's le/itimate sons entitled to share in the
inheritance. #efore inter0ention 'as allo'ed, the =ill brothers 'ere re:uired to
establish their ri/ht and interest in the estate as a forced heirs (this co0ers both
natural, le/itimate, ille/itimate) and to this end formal hearin/ 'as held and testimony,
consistin/ of 13 %a/es, 'as taAen. "fter the hearin/, the %etition to inter0ene 'as
denied, 'hereu%on the 'ould be inter0enors tooA ste%s to a%%eal 'as disa%%ro0ed.
("lthou/h the reasons for the disa%%ro0al is not sho'n in the entries, e5traneous
e0idence states that the record on a%%eal 'as filed out of time.) here bein/ no other
matters to attend to the administratri5 submitted a final accountin/ and a %ro1ect of
%artition by order of the court, both 'ere in due time a%%ro0ed, the %artition 'as
carried out, and the e5%ediente 'as closed.
Su%%lementin/ the entries aforesaid are t'o other documentsJ B5hibit 676, the %ro1ect
of %artition, dated "%ril 70, 1+@0, a%%ro0in/ the %artition. he %ro1ect of %artition stated
that Percy ". =ill had married t'ice, included all the %ro%erties of 'hich hill died
seized, desi/nated as =ill's sole heirs all the defendants in the %resent action, and
assi/ned to them the residue of the estate after all the e5%enses and obli/ations 'ere
%aid.
-t thus a%%ears beyond doubt that all the facts raised in the %resent suit 'ere alle/ed,
discussed, and definitely ad1udicated in the e5%ediente of =ill's intestate. he only
instance that 'e can thinA of in 'hich a %arty interested in a %robate %roceedin/ may
ha0e a final li:uidation set aside is 'hen he is left out by reason of circumstances
beyond his control or throu/h mistaAe or inad0ertence not im%utable to ne/li/ence.
B0en then, the better %ractice to secure relief is reo%enin/ of the same case by %ro%er
motion 'ithin the re/lementary %eriod, instead of an inde%endent action of the effect
of 'hich if successful, 'ould be, as in the instant case, for another court or 1ud/e to
thro' out a decision or order already final and e5ecuted and reshuffle %ro%erties lon/
a/o distributed and dis%osed of.
$n re estate o< &n,ra0+o 4rense, *e0ease*.
&%3&5$" :. S"514S, 7$%)" )& 4R&5S&, %etitioner8a%%ellant,
0s.
1(& R4:"5 !"1(4L$! 8$S(4. 49 5%&7" !"!&R&S, o%%onent8a%%ellee
(F.<. .o. L82123+ "%ril 5, 1+2@)
&actsJ
he deceased left a 'ill, accordin/ to 'hich si5 %arcels of land 'ere left to the <oman
$atholic $hurch as trustee for 0arious %ur%oses, sub1ect to a life estate in fa0or of the
a%%ellant 'ho, in the absence of descendants, ascendants and collateral heirs of the
deceased, 'as made his uni0ersal testamentary heir.
he 'ill 'as %robated on 2arch *, 1+1+, and the a%%ellant 'as a%%ointed e5ecutri5.
he administratri5 told the court that the estate o'ed Pacific $ommercial $om%any
some money for the %urchase of se0eral e:ui%ment to be used in the electric li/ht
%lant in Fuiobatan (deceased 'as /ranted a franchise durin/ his lifetime). She asAed
the court to allo' her to either sell or mort/a/e some liberty bonds or to /et a loan.
he court /ranted her authority to do either of the t'o.
(n .o0ember 20, 1+1+, a%%ellant 'ho had then been a%%ointed administratri5 'ith
the 'ill anne5ed, filed a motion 'ith the court of &irst -nstance asAin/ that the
declaration of heirs made by the testator in his 'ill be confirmed, and that a
commission be a%%ointed to maAe a nominal di0ision of the estate, the 'ord 6nominal6
bein/ used because, accordin/ to the terms of the 'ill, all of the %ro%erty 'as to
remain in %ossession of the a%%ellant in usufruct. his motion 'as /ranted by order of
9ecember 71, 1+1+, the court declarin/ the a%%ellant the uni0ersal heir of the testator
and %ro0idin/ that the 0arious le/atees under the 'ill should not taAe %ossession of
their res%ecti0e le/acies durin/ the lifetime of the a%%ellant or 'hile 6the debts of the
deceased occasioned by the establishment of the electric li/ht %lant in Fuinobatan
remained un%aid.6 -n the same order the court also a%%ointed a commissioner to
%artition the estate in accordance 'ith the 'ill and declared that the %ur%ose of the
%artition 'as to secure the termination of the testamentary %roceedin/s and ha0e the
interests of the %arties recorded in the re/istry of deeds.
"fter the %artition, the a%%ellant came to court a/ain. his time she 'as asAin/ for the
sale of se0eral %arcels of land that 'as a'arded to the <oman $hatholic $hurch in
order to ans'er of se0eral debts. She e0en %resented an indorsement from the %arish
%riest. "fter the re:uest 'as a%%ro0ed she came to court a/ain asAin/ for a license to
sell se0eral other %ro%erties. "t this %oint the <$$ o%%osed alle/in/ first, that the
court already lost 1urisdiction to decide o0er the %ro%erties after it a'arded the
%artition 'hich 'as recorder in the <e/ister of 9eeds and second, that the license
/i0en to the a%%ellant 'as not 0alid.
-J ;(. the a%%eal to the /rant of the license to sell, bein/ filed more than a year after
it 'as issued, 'as filed out of time> (.()
;(. the court still had 1urisdiction to /rant the license to sell> (.one)
=J 1) he order /rantin/ a license can be a%%ealed because such order 'as of a
character 'hich /a0e 1ud/ment on all the issues. =o'e0er, the a%%eal bein/ filed
more than a year later must be :uestioned to/ether 'ith the second issue.

2) "t the time of the /rantin/ of the license, a distribution of the estate of the
deceased had been made, the order of distribution had become final and the title to
the estate in remainder de0ised to the <oman $atholic $hurch had become 0ested.
"s far as the title to the %ro%erty 'as concerned, the administration %roceedin/s 'ere
then terminated and the court had lost its 1urisdiction in res%ect thereto. here mi/ht
still be a lien on the %ro%erty for the debts of the deceased and the le/itimate
e5%enses of administration, but it seems ob0ious that the court could ha0e no
1urisdiction to foreclose this lien and order the %ro%erty sold unless some sort of notice
'as /i0en the holder of the title. .o notice, neither actual nor constructi0e, 'as /i0en
in the %resent case. -t does not e0en a%%ear that the order of sale 'as recorded in the
office of the re/istry of deeds as re:uired by subsection , of section ,22 of the $ode
of $i0il Procedure. he order of sale 'as therefore 0oid for 'ant of 1urisdiction in the
court and could be 0acated at any time before it had been acted u%on and a sale
made and confirmed.
)C E$%, *e0ease*. )C !"C, a*;+n+strator o< t/e estate o< )C E$%, *e0ease*,
a%%ellant,
0s.
!R4SS9$&L) G 4A8R$&5, a%%ellees
(F.<. .o. L8127,5 "u/ust 70, 1+13)
&actsJ
" $hinaman by the name of 9y $ay 'as a%%ointed administrator of the estate of the
$hinaman 9y Liu, deceased. he administrator desired to %rosecute an action a/ainst
the firm of 9y #uncio U $o. for the li:uidation of the %artnershi% business in 'hich the
deceased had been interested. o initiate and %ush the necessary le/al %roceedin/s,
the administrator, a%%arently under authority from the court, entered into a contract
'ith "ttorneys $rossfield U ('#rien 'ith the a/reement that they 'ill /i0e 10T of 'hat
can be collected from the com%any, as %ayment, to the firm.
$rossfield and (D#rien contracted 'ith a certain 2acleod to determine the share of 9y
Liu in the com%any. heir contract, 'hich 'as si/ned by the other %artners, also
stated that each 'ill be bound by the findin/s of 2acleod and that the other %artners
'ere to be /i0en the o%%ortunity to %urchased the shares of 9y Liu in order to %re0ent
li:uidation. he contract 'as si/ned by $rossfield and (D#rien in behalf of the estate.
2acleodDs findin/s re0ealed that the deceased o'ned @0,*7* of the %artnershi%. "fter
this 'as released, the administrator said that he 'as not bound by the contract
because he neither si/ned nor authorized it.
-J (1) ;hether section 1@5 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, as amended by "ct .o.
27@,, relatin/ to ne' trials, should be construed as fi5in/ a time limit 'ithin 'hich a
1ud/e of first instance can set aside a 1ud/ment and /rant a ne' trial
(2) 'hether the la' firm of $rossfield U ('#rien should be %aid for their %rofessional
ser0ices in certain intestate %roceedin/s on a !uantum meruit basis or on the basis of
the terms of the contract 'ith their client.

=J 1) he first assi/nment of error readsJ 6he court erred in its order dated "u/ust
1,, 1+1*, in re0oAin/, settin/ aside, and modifyin/ the order of 2arch 71, 1+1*, after
the time had ela%sed in 'hich the court had 1urisdiction to re0oAe, set aside or modify
said order of 2arch 71, 1+1*.6
he ri/ht of a defeated %arty to ha0e an error in a 1ud/ment corrected should not be
taAen a'ay from him by a mere delay on the %art of the 1ud/e in decidin/ the motion,
a delay for 'hich the defeated %arty 'ould in no 'ay be res%onsible. (See Santos vs"
Killafuerte V1+0*W, 5 Phil., ,7+.) he time durin/ 'hich a court considers a motion to
set aside a 1ud/ment or for a ne' trial should not be counted in determinin/ the
statutory %eriod. o say that all motions of this character must be decided 'ithin thirty
days after notice of a decision, re/ardless of their im%ortance or difficulty, or of the
time of submission, 'ould be sub0ersi0e of 1ustice. -f the %ro0ision of la' is to be held
ri/id and mandatory, the effect 'ill be to re:uire many motions to be decided 'ithout
due consideration, a result 'hich 'ill defeat the s%irit of the code. (5ee Fomer vs"
$haffe V1330W, 5 $olo., 737.) "ctually a%%lyin/ these 0ie's to our %resent facts, since
the motion 'as %resented in time, the court e0en after the e5%iration of the thirty day
%eriod had 1urisdiction to consider the motion and to modify or set aside its 1ud/ment

2) he second and third assi/nments of error assail the action of the $ourt in
allo'in/ $rossfield U ('#rien the full amount %ro0ided for in the contract, as attorney's
fees.
he contract e5ecuted by the administrator and "ttorneys $rossfield U ('#rien 'as
0alid and reasonable. he attorneys, ha0in/ %erformed the tasA assi/ned to them,
should recei0e the %ayment e5%ressly authorized.
he order of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of "u/ust 1,, 1+1*, is affirmed, 'ith costs
a/ainst a%%ellant. So ordered.
>%"5$1" L4.&6 3%$L"S, %etitioner,
0s.
>%)3& 49 1(& !4%R1 49 9$RS1 $5S1"5!& 49 .":."53" "5) "L&>"5)R4
L4.&6 res%ondents .
(F.<. .o. L82**+5 )anuary 71, 1+,2)
&actsJ
-n a <esolution dated (ctober 2*, 1+57 in S%. Proc. .o. 3+@ entitled 6Bn el "sunto de
la "do%cion de la 2enor )uanita Lo%ez y Limson6, herein %etitioner )uanita Lo%ez,
then sin/le and no' married to &ederico Fuilas, 'as declared le/ally ado%ted
dau/hter and le/al heir of the s%ouses )acinta and "le1andro. "fter ado%tin/ le/ally
herein %etitioner )uanita Lo%ez, the testatri5 9oSa )acinta did not e5ecute another 'ill
or codicil so as to include )uanita Lo%ez as one of her heirs.
.e0ertheless, in a %ro1ect of %artition dated 2arch 1+, 1+*0 e5ecuted by both
"le1andro Lo%ez and )uanita Lo%ez Fuilas, the ri/ht of )uanita Lo%ez to inherit from
)acinta 'as reco/nized and Lots .os. 77*3 and 7@@1. -n an order dated "%ril 27,
1+*0, the lo'er court a%%ro0ed the said %ro1ect of %artition and directed that the
records of the case be sent to the archi0es, u%on %ayment of the estate and
inheritance ta5es. (n "%ril 10, 1+*@, herein %etitioner )uanita Lo%ez8Fuilas filed a
se%arate ordinary action to set aside and annul the %ro1ect of %artition on the /round
of lesion, %er%etration and fraud, and %ray further that "le1andro Lo%ez be ordered to
submit a statement of accounts of all the cro%s and to deli0er immediately to )uanita
lots nos. 77*3 and 7@@1 of the #acolor $adastre, 'hich 'ere allocated to her under
the %ro1ect of %artition.
"le1andro Lo%ez claims that, by 0irtue of the order dated "%ril 27, 1+*0 'hich
a%%ro0ed the %ro1ect of %artition submitted by both "le1andro and )uanita and directed
that the records of the case be archi0ed u%on %ayment of the estate and inheritance
ta5es, and the order of 9ecember 15, 1+*0 'hich 6ordered closed and terminated the
%resent case6, the testate %roceedin/s had already been closed and terminatedI and
that he ceased as a conse:uence to be the e5ecutor of the estate of the deceasedI
and that )uanita Lo%ez is /uilty of laches and ne/li/ence in filin/ the %etition of the
deli0ery of her share @ years after such closure of the estate, 'hen she could ha0e
filed a %etition for relief of 1ud/ment 'ithin si5ty (*0) days from 9ecember 15, 1+*0
under <ule 73 of the old <ules of $ourt.
)uanita contends that the actual deli0ery and distribution of the hereditary
shares to the heirs, and not the order of the court declarin/ as closed and terminated
the %roceedin/s, determines the termination of the %robate %roceedin/s citin/
-ntestate estate of 2ercedes $ano, imbol 0s. $ano, 'here it 'as ruled that 6the
%robate court loses 1urisdiction of an estate under administration only after the
%ayment of all the ta5es, and after the remainin/ estate is deli0ered to the heirs
entitled to recei0e the same6. hat the e5ecutor "le1andro is esto%%ed from o%%osin/
her %etition because he 'as the one 'ho %re%ared, filed and secured court a%%ro0al
of, the aforesaid %ro1ect of %artition, 'hich she seeAs to be im%lemented. Lastly, she
said that she is not /uilty of laches, because 'hen she filed on )uly 20, 1+*@, her
%etition for he deli0ery of her share allocated to her under the %ro1ect of %artition, less
than 7 years had ela%sed from "u/ust 23, 1+*1 'hen the amended %ro1ect of %artition
'as a%%ro0ed, 'hich is 'ithin the 58year %eriod for the e5ecution of 1ud/ment by
motion
-J ;(. the court already lost 1urisdiction u%on issuance of the order> (.()
=J he %robate court loses 1urisdiction of an estate under administration only after the
%ayment of all the debts and the remainin/ estate deli0ered to the heirs entitled to
recei0e the same. he finality of the a%%ro0al of the %ro1ect of %artition by itself alone
does not terminate the %robate %roceedin/. "s lon/ as the order of the distribution of
the estate has not been com%lied 'ith, the %robate %roceedin/s cannot be deemed
closed and terminated because a 1udicial %artition is not final and conclusi0e and does
not %re0ent the heir from brin/in/ an action to obtain his share, %ro0ided the
%rescri%ti0e %eriod therefor has not ela%sed. he better %ractice, ho'e0er, for the heir
'ho has not recei0ed his share, is to demand his share throu/h a %ro%er motion in the
same %robate or administration %roceedin/s, or for re8o%enin/ of the %robate or
administrati0e %roceedin/s if it had already been closed, and not throu/h an
inde%endent action, 'hich 'ould be tried by another court or )ud/e 'hich may thus
re0erse a decision or order of the %robate on intestate court already final and
e5ecuted and re8shuffle %ro%erties lon/ a/o distributed and dis%osed of.
Section 1 of <ule +0 of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt of 1+*@ as 'orded, 'hich
secures for the heirs or le/atees the ri/ht to 6demand and reco0er their res%ecti0e
shares from the e5ecutor or administrator, or any other %erson ha0in/ the same in his
%ossession6.
;=B<B&(<B, 1ud/ment is hereby rendered directin/J
(a) the <e/ister of 9eeds of Pam%an/a to cancel $ .o. 2**738< co0erin/ the
aforesaid lots .os. 77*3 and 7@@1 of the #acolor $adastre and to issue ane'
ransfer $ertificate of itle co0erin/ the said t'o lots in the name of herein %etitioner
)uanita Lo%ez FuilasI and
(b) the res%ondent "le1andro Lo%ez
(1) to deli0er to herein %etitioner )uanita Lo%ez Fuilas the %ossession of lots
.os. 77*3 and 7@@1I
(2) to deli0er and4or %ay to herein, %etitioner all the rents, cro%s or income
collected by him from said lots .os. 77*3 and 7@@1 from "%ril 27, 1+*0 until the
%ossession of the t'o aforementioned lots is actually deli0ered to her, or their 0alue
based on the current marAet %rice.
Qu+on et0. vs. !-ar+*a* et a-. >anuary 30, 1943
VF<. @35@1 )anuary 70, 1+@7W
K"LB<-"." !C-(., B$., %laintiffs and a%%ellees, 0s. K-$B.B $L"<-9"9 B "L.,
defendants. K-$B.B $L"<-9"9, F(9(&<B9( &"2? and BCL"L-" $L"<-9"9,
a%%ellants.

9"!1S'
-n the intestate %roceedin/s of a deceased, %rosecuted by a%%ellants, the latter
Ano'in/ly concealed the fact that said deceased left a second 'ife 'ith 'hom he had
t'o children, namely, herein a%%ellees.

$SS%&S'
(1) ;(. heirs by the 2nd marria/e may inherit P ?BS
(2) ;(. intestate %roceedin/s could be reo%ened after the e5%iration of the t'o8
year %eriod fi5ed in sections 5+, and 5+3 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure. P ?BS

(&L)KR"1$4'
(1)he trial court in a subse:uent action brou/ht by a%%ellees to reco0er their le/al
%artici%ations in the deceased's estate, correctly declared said a%%ellees co8o'ners of
the estate in :uestion to the e5tent of one8half thereof, 'ith ri/ht to its %ossession.

(2)here is no merit in a%%ellants' claim that the intestate %roceedin/s could no lon/er
be reo%ened after the e5%iration of the t'oyear %eriod fi5ed in sections 5+, and 5+3 of
the $ode of $i0il Procedure. -t suffices to state that this is an action by the heirs of the
deceased by his second marria/e 'hose dominion o0er their share in the inheritance
'as automatically and by o%eration of la' 0ested in them u%on the death of said
deceased, sub1ect only to the lien of the latter's creditors, for the %ur%ose of obtainin/
relief on the /round of fraud, 'hich action may be brou/ht 'ithin four years after the
disco0ery of the fraud, in accordance 'ith section @7 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure.

:ar+ an* &van,e-+sta vs. 8on+--a an* 4r*aPez :ar0/ 19, 1949

9"!1S'
$asimiro B0an/elista is a re/istered o'ner of a %arcel of land (homestead) as
e0idenced by (ri/inal $ertificate of itle .o. @+05, of the re/ister of deeds of .ue0a
Bci1a, consistin/ of ,.0*52 hectares, more or less situated at Kaldefuente,
$abanatuan, .ue0a Bci1a. =e 'as married to Leonida 2ari, %laintiff herein on
&ebruary ,, 1+20 at <izal, .ue0a Bci1a, and durin/ their marria/e and 'hile li0in/
to/ether as s%ouses, they be/ot t'o children, $aridad and 9eo/racias B0an/elista.
=e died intestate.

(n )anuary 10, 1+@@, 9eo/racias B0an/elista alle/in/ to be the only heir of $asimiro
B0an/elista, e5ecuted a declaration of heirshi% Ano'n as 9oe. .o. +, Pa/e 70, #ooA
.o. 13, of .otary Public, $arlos 2. &errer. &or the sum of P2,@00, 9eo/racias
B0an/elista sold on the same date, the %ro%erty in :uestion to the defendants,
s%ouses, -saac #onilla and Sil0ina (rdafiez. (ri/inal certificate of title .o. @+05 'as
cancelled and in lieu thereof transfer certificate of title .o. 1+++1 'as issued to the
s%ouses.

his action 'as brou/ht to reco0er Leonida 2ari and $aridad B0an/elistaDs combined
74@, share in the %arcel of land sold by 9eo/racias.

he defendants did not Ano' that Leonida 2ari is the mother of 9eo/racias
B0an/elista at the time 'hen he bou/ht the land as 9eo/racias B0an/elista 'as li0in/
'ith his /randfather, 2atias B0an/elistaI and that $aridad B0an/elista 'as li0in/ 'ith
her mother, Leonida 2ariI

$SS%&S'
(1) ;(. /ood faith is a defense for the s%ouses P .(
(2) ;(. the 1udicial %artition in fa0or of 9eo/racias bound Leonida 2ari and
$aridad B0an/elista. P .(

(&L)KR"1$4'

(1) Food faith affords %rotection only to %urchasers for 0alue from the re/istered
o'ner. 9eo/racias B0an/elista, defendants' /rantor, is not a re/istered o'ner. he
land 'as and still is re/istered in the name of $asimiro B0an/elista. -n no 'ay does
the certificate of title state that 9eo/racias o'ned the landI conse:uently defendants
cannot summon to their aid the theory of indefeasibility of orrens title. here is
nothin/ in the certificate and in the circumstances of the transaction 'hich 'arrant.
them in su%%osin/ that they needed not looAed beyond the title. -f anythin/, it should
ha0e %ut them on their /uard, cautioned them to ascertain and 0erify that the 0endor
'as the only heir of his father, that there 'as no debt, and that the latter 'as the sole
o'ner of the %arcel.

(2) -f, as is %robably the case, defendants relied on the court's order ad1udicatin/ to
9eo/racias B0an/elista the entire estate in the distribution held under <ule ,@ of the
<ules of $ourt, their innocence a0ails them less as a/ainst the true o'ners of the
land.

hat 'as a summary settlement made on the faith and stren/th of the distributee's
self8ser0in/ affida0itI and section @ of the abo0e8mentioned rule %ro0ides that, 6-f it
shall a%%ear at anytime 'ithin t'o years after the settlement and distribution of an
estate M M M that an heir or other %erson has been unduly de%ri0ed of his la'ful
%artici%ation in the estate, such heir or other %erson may com%el the settlement of the
estate in the court in the manner herein %ro0ided for the %ur%ose of satisfyin/ such
%artici%ation.6 &ar from shieldin/ defendants a/ainst loss, the ad1udication and the
rule under 'hich it 'as made /a0e them a clear 'arnin/ that they 'ere actin/ at their
%eril. 6" 1udicial %artition in %robate %roceedin/s does not bind the heirs 'ho 'ere not
%arties thereto. .o %artition, 1udicial or e5tra1udicial, could add one iota or %article to
the interest 'hich the %artitioners had durin/ the 1oint %ossession.

Partition is of the nature of a con0eyance of o'nershi%, and certainly none of the co8
o'ners may con0ey to the others more than his o'n true ri/ht. " 1udicial %artition in
%robate %roceedin/s is not final and conclusi0e, and not bein/ of such definiti0e
character as to sto% all means of redress for a co8heir 'ho has been de%ri0ed of his
la'ful share, such co8heir may still, 'ithin the %rescri%ti0e %eriod, brin/ an action for
rei0indicacion in the %ro0ince 'here any of the real %ro%erty of the deceased may be
situated. #road %ers%ecti0es of %ublic %olicy are set out in the o%inion of the court in
su%%ort of the 'isdom of allo'in/ a co8heir the benefits of the la' of %rescri%tion e0en
after a %artition, 1udicial or e5tra1udicial, has been had.6 (La1om 0s. Kiola, ,7 Phil.,
5*7.)

"ustr+a vs. 1/e (e+rs t/e -ate "nton+o 7enten+--a Se2te;ber 19, 19#6

9"!1S'
"%%eal from the orders of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of Pan/asinan dated (ctober 1*
and .o0ember 23, 1+50, denyin/ a%%ellants' motion in $i0il $ase .o. 27, (estate
Bstate of the 9eceased "ntonio Kentenilla) to remo0e administratri5 "le1andra "ustria
from office and a%%oint a ne' administrator in her %lace.

(&L)KR"1$4'
he a%%eal is 'ithout merit. he %roceedin/s for the settlement of the estate of the
deceased and the issues no' raised by a%%ellants had been settled and decided by
the court's order of (ctober .7, 1+10.

Cnder "ct 1+0, an e5%ress order of closure after the estate had been distributed
amon/ the heirs 'as a mere formality for the termination of the %roceedin/s.

(rder affirmed, 'ith costs a/ainst a%%ellants.
<eyes, ).#.L., ).,%onente.

1(& (&$RS 49 1(& L"1& >&S%S 9R"5 an* !"R:&5 :&>$" R4)R$3%&6 0s.
(45. 8&R5"R)4 LL. S"L"S, !45!&.!$45 :&>$" &S.$5" an* :"R$" :&>$"
3"5)$453!4
9"!1S'
<emedios 2. Kda. de iose1o, a 'ido', died on 10 )uly 1+,2 in $ebu $ity 'ith neither
descendants nor ascendantsI she left real and %ersonal %ro%erties located in $ebu
$ity, (rmoc $ity and Puerto #ello, 2erida, Leyte. Barlier, on 27 "%ril 1+,2, she
e5ecuted a last 'ill and testament 3 'herein she be:ueathed to her collateral
relati0es (brothers, sisters, ne%he's and nieces) all her %ro%erties, and desi/nated
<osario an or, u%on the latter's death, )esus &ran, as e5ecutor to ser0e 'ithout bond.
-nstrumental 'itnesses to the 'ill 'ere .azario Pac:uiao, "lcio 9emerre and Primo
2iro.
(n 15 )uly 1+,2, )esus &ran filed a %etition 'ith the $ourt of &irst instance of $ebu
for the %robate of <emedios' last 'ill and testament. he case 'as raffled to the
ori/inal #ranch K--- thereof 'hich 'as then %resided o0er by )ud/e "ntonio 9. $inco.
he %etition alle/ed that <osario an is not %hysically 'ell and, therefore, 'ill not be
assumin/ the %osition of administratri5. an si/ned a 'ai0er in fa0or of )esus &ran on
the third %a/e of the said %etition. he %robate court issued an order settin/ the
%etition for hearin/ on 13 Se%tember 1+,2. 2ean'hile, on 71 )uly 1+,2, the court
a%%ointed %etitioner )esus &ran as s%ecial administrator.
(n 10 "u/ust 1+,2, the %ri0ate res%ondents, 'ho are sisters of the deceased,
filed a manifestation # alle/in/ that they needed time to study the %etition because
some heirs 'ho are entitled to recei0e their res%ecti0e shares ha0e been intentionally
omitted therein, and %rayin/ that they be /i0en am%le time to file their o%%osition, after
'hich the hearin/ be reset to another date.
Pri0ate res%ondents did not file any o%%osition. -nstead, they filed on 13 Se%tember
1+,2 a 6;ithdra'al of (%%osition to the "llo'ance of Probateof the ;ill6 'herein they
e5%ressly manifested, 'ith their 6full Ano'led/e and consent that . . . they ha0e no
ob1ection of (sic) the allo'ance of the . . . 'ill of the late <emedios 2e1ia Kda. de
iose1o,6 and that they ha0e 6no ob1ection to the issuance of letters testamentary in
fa0or of %etitioner, 9r. )esus &ran.6
.o other %arty filed an o%%osition. he %etition thus became uncontested.
(n 17 .o0ember 1+,2, the %robate court rendered a decision admittin/ to %robate the
'ill of the testatri5, <emedios 2e1ia Kda. de iose1o, and a%%ointin/ %etitioner &ran as
e5ecutor thereof.
"fter the hearin/ on the Pro1ect of Partition, the court issued its (rder of 10
Se%tember 1+,7 a%%ro0in/ the same, declarin/ the %arties therein as the only heirs
entitled to the estate of <emedios 2e1ia Kda. de iose1o, directin/ the administrator to
deli0er to the said %arties their res%ecti0e shares and decreein/ the %roceedin/s
closed.
hereafter, the aforesaid #ranch K--- of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of
$ebu 'as con0erted to a )u0enile and 9omestic <elations $ourt. (n .o0ember
1+,3, by 0irtue of Presidential 9ecree .o. 1@7+, #ranch NK-- (9a0ao $ity) of the
$ourt of &irst -nstance of $ebu, %resided o0er by herein res%ondent )ud/e, 'as
officially transferred to $ebu $ity and renumbered as #ranch K---.
(n 1 (ctober 1+,+, %ri0ate res%ondents filed 'ith the ne' #ranch K--- an
(mnibus 2otion for <econsideration of the %robate 1ud/ment of 17 .o0ember 1+,2
and the (rder of %artition of 10 Se%tember 1+,7, in said motion, they asA the court to
declare the %roceedin/s still o%en and admit their o%%osition to the allo'ance of the
'ill, 'hich they filed on 1 (ctober 1+,+. hey alle/e thatJ (a) they 'ere not furnished
'ith a co%y of the 'illI (b) the 'ill is a for/eryI (c) they 'ere not notified of any
resolution or order on their manifestation re:uestin/ time 'ithin 'hich to file their
o%%osition, or of the order authorizin/ the clerA of court to recei0e the e0idence for the
%etitioner, or of the order closin/ the %roceedin/sI (d) the rece%tion of e0idence by the
clerA of court 'as 0oid %er the rulin/ in 9im Tanhu vs" 0amoleteI (e) the %ro1ect of
%artition contains no notice of hearin/ and they 'ere not notified thereofI (f) the
%etitioner si/ned the %ro1ect of %artition as administrator and not as e5ecutor, thereby
%ro0in/ that the decedent died intestateI (/) the %etitioner did not submit any
accountin/ as re:uired by la'I and (h) the %etitioner ne0er distributed the estate to the
de0isees and le/atees.
-n a detailed o%%osition to the abo0e (mnibus 2otion for <econsideration, %etitioner
&ran refuted all the %rotestations of %ri0ate res%ondents. .ot'ithstandin/ %etitioners'
ob1ections, res%ondent )ud/e issued on 2* &ebruary 1+30 an (rder settin/ for
hearin/ the said (mnibus 2otion for <econsideration on 3 "%ril 1+30 so that 6the
'itnesses and the e5hibits (may be) %ro%erly 0entilated.6 1
$SS%&S'
(1) ;(. %ri0ate res%ondents are esto%%ed P ?BS
(2) ;(. formal notice 'as necessary P .(
(7) ;(. the %robate 1ud/ment of 17 .o0ember 1+,2, lon/ final and undisturbed by
any attem%t to unsettle it, had ine0itably %assed beyond the reach of the court belo'
to annul or set the same aside, by mere motion, on the /round that the 'ill is a for/ery
P ?BS
(@) ;(. the non8distribution of the estate is a /round for the re8o%enin/ of the
testate %roceedin/s 88 .(
(&L)'
;e do not hesitate to rule that the res%ondent )ud/e committed /ra0e abuse of
discretion amountin/ to lacA of 1urisdiction 'hen he /ranted the (mnibus 2otion for
<econsideration and thereafter set aside the %robate 1ud/ment of 17 .o0ember 1+,2
in S%. Proc. .o. 770+8<, declared the sub1ect 'ill of the testatri5 a for/ery, nullified the
testamentary dis%ositions therein and ordered the con0ersion of the testate
%roceedin/s into one of intestacy.
(1)-t is not dis%uted that %ri0ate res%ondents filed on the day of the initial hearin/ of
the %etition their 6;ithdra'al of (%%osition o "llo'ance of Probate (sic) ;ill6 'herein
they une:ui0ocally state that they ha0e no ob1ection to the allo'ance of the 'ill. &or
all le/al intents and %ur%oses, they became %ro%onents of the same.
"fter the %robate court rendered its decision on 17 .o0ember 1+,2, and there ha0in/
been no claim %resented des%ite %ublication of notice to creditors, %etitioner &ran
submitted a Pro1ect of Partition 'hich %ri0ate res%ondent 2aria 2. Kda. de
Fandion/co 0oluntarily si/ned and to 'hich %ri0ate res%ondent Bs%ina e5%ressed her
conformity throu/h a certification filed 'ith the %robate court.
(2)"ssumin/ for the saAe of ar/ument that %ri0ate res%ondents did not recei0e a
formal notice of the decision as they claim in their (mnibus 2otion for
<econsideration, these acts ne0ertheless constitute indubitable %roof of their %rior
actual Ano'led/e of the same.
" formal notice 'ould ha0e been an idle ceremony. -n testate %roceedin/s, a decision
lo/ically %recedes the %ro1ect of %artition, 'hich is normally an im%lementation of the
'ill and is amon/ the last o%erati0e acts to terminate the %roceedin/s. -f %ri0ate
res%ondents did not ha0e actual Ano'led/e of the decision, they should ha0e desisted
from %erformin/ the abo0e acts and instead demanded from %etitioner &ran the
fulfillment of his alle/ed %romise to sho' them the 'ill.
he same conclusion refutes and defeats the %lea that they 'ere not notified of the
order authorizin/ the $lerA of $ourt to recei0e the e0idence and that the $lerA of
$ourt did not notify them of the date of the rece%tion of e0idence. #esides, such %lea
must fail because %ri0ate res%ondents 'ere %resent 'hen the court dictated the said
order.
(7) he %robate 1ud/ment of 17 .o0ember 1+,2, lon/ final and undisturbed by any
attem%t to unsettle it, had ine0itably %assed beyond the reach of the court belo' to
annul or set the same aside, by mere motion, on the /round that the 'ill is a for/ery.
Settled is the rule that the decree of %robate is conclusi0e 'ith res%ect to the due
e5ecution of the 'ill and it cannot be im%u/ned on any of the /rounds authorized by
la', e5ce%t that of fraud, in any se%arate or inde%endent action or %roceedin/. ;e
'ish also to ad0ert to the related doctrine 'hich holds that final 1ud/ments are entitled
to res%ect and should not be disturbedI other'ise, there 'ould be a 'a0erin/ of trust
in the courts. -n 9ee 3un Ting vs" -ligaen, this $ourt had the occasion to state the
rationale of this doctrine, thusJ <easons of %ublic %olicy, 1udicial orderliness, economy
and 1udicial time and the interests of liti/ants, as 'ell as the %eace and order of
society, all re:uire that stability be accorded the solemn and final 1ud/ments of the
courts or tribunals of com%etent 1urisdiction. his is so e0en if the decision is incorrect
or, in criminal cases, the %enalty im%osed is erroneous.
(@) he non8distribution of the estate, 'hich is 0i/orously denied by the %etitioners, is
not a /round for the re8o%enin/ of the testate %roceedin/s. " seasonable motion for
e5ecution should ha0e been filed. -n 1e *esus vs" 1a%a, this $ourt ruled that if the
e5ecutor or administrator has %ossession of the share to be deli0ered, the %robate
court 'ould ha0e 1urisdiction 'ithin the same estate %roceedin/ to order him to
transfer that %ossession to the %erson entitled thereto. his is authorized under
Section 1, <ule +0 of the <ules of $ourt. =o'e0er, if no motion for e5ecution is filed
'ithin the re/lementary %eriod, a se%arate action for the reco0ery of the shares 'ould
be in order. "s ;e see it, the attacA of 10 Se%tember 1+,7 on the (rder 'as 1ust a
cle0er %loy to /i0e asemblance of stren/th and substance to the (mnibus 2otion for
<econsideration by de%ictin/ therein a %robate court committin/ a series of fatal,
substanti0e and %rocedural blunders, 'hich ;e find to be ima/inary, if not deliberately
fabricated.
<ule +0 Sec 187
1orres, et.a-. vs. &n0arna0+on an* *e 8or=a
9a0tsJ
he %etitioners contest the 1urisdiction of the res%ondent )ud/e to issue the order
herein sou/ht to be re0ie'ed directin/ them to deli0er to the administrator of the
intestate estate of 2arcelo de #or1a, a certain %arcel of land 'hich is in %etitioners'
%ossession and to 'hich they assert e5clusi0e o'nershi%.
-t a%%ears that in the abo0e8entitled intestate estate, the commissioners a%%ointed by
the court submitted a %ro1ect of %artition, in 'hich the land in :uestion, 'hich 'as in
the %ossession of %etitioners, sur0i0in/ children of !uintin de #or1a 'ho 'as one of
2arcelo's children, 'as included as %ro%erty of the estate and assi/ned to one 2i/uel
#. 9ayco, one of 2arcelo de #or1a's heirs. (0er the ob1ection of the %etitioners, the
%ro%osed %artition 'as a%%ro0ed in &ebruary, 1+@*, and the order of a%%ro0al on
a%%eal 'as affirmed by this $ourt in 1+@+.
$ssueJ ;4. herein %etitioners can :uestion the 0alidity of %artition entered into and
already a%%ro0ed by the court
(e-*J .o. he %artition here had not only been a%%ro0ed and thus become a
1ud/ment of the court, but distribution of the estate in %ursuance of the %artition had
been fully carried out e5ce%t as to land no' in dis%ute, and the %etitioners had
recei0ed the %ro%erty assi/ned to them or their father's estate. he court had only the
%artition to e5amine, to see if the :uestioned land 'as included therein. he inclusion
bein/ sho'n, and there bein/ no alle/ation that the inclusion 'as effected throu/h
im%ro%er means or 'ithout the %etitioners' Ano'led/e, t/e 2art+t+on barre* any
<urt/er -+t+,at+on on sa+* t+t-e an* o2erate* to br+n, t/e 2ro2erty un*er t/e
0ontro- an* =ur+s*+0t+on o< t/e 0ourt <or 2ro2er *+s2os+t+on a00or*+n, to t/e
tenor o< t/e 2art+t+on.
he %etitioners are in esto%%el. -n the face of 'hat they ha0e done, they are %recluded
from attacAin/ the 0alidity of the %artition or any %art of it. " %arty can not, in la' and in
/ood conscience, be allo'ed to rea% the fruits of a %artition, a/reement or 1ud/ment
and re%udiate 'hat does not suit him.
Ru-e 91 Se0 1
1(& :%5$!$."L !4%5!$L 49 S"5 .&)R4, L"3%5", &1 "L., vs. !4L&3$4 )&
S"5 >4S&, $5!., &1 "L.
9a0tsJ
his is an a%%eal from the order of the $ourt 'hich denied the %etition for escheat
filed by the said %etitioners, 'ith the costs a/ainst the latter.
his case 'as commenced in the said by a %etition filed by the %etitioners in behalf of
the munici%ality of San Pedro, Pro0ince of La/una, 'herein they claim the =acienda
de San Pedro unasa by the ri/ht of escheat.
-ssueJ ;4. $(LBF-( 9B S". )(SB, -.$., B "L. may be %arties to the case> ?es.
;4. the land is %ro%er sub1ect of escheat> .o.
<atioJ
he s'orn %etition 'hich /a0e rise to the %roceedin/ is based u%on the %ro0isions of
section ,50 and ,51 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, the Bn/lish te5t of 'hich readsJ
SB$. ,50. 4rocedure when person dies intestate without heirs. X ;hen a %erson
dies intestate, seized of real or %ersonal %ro%erty in the Phili%%ines -slands, lea0in/ no
heir or %erson by la' entitled to the same, the %resident and munici%al council of the
munici%ality 'here the deceased last resided, if he 'as an inhabitant of these -slands,
or of the munici%ality in 'hich he had estate, if he resided out of the -slands, may, on
behalf of the munici%ality, the file a %etition 'ith the $ourt of &irst -nstance of the
%ro0ince for an in:uisition in the %remisesO
SB$. ,51. 1ecree of the court in such case. X -f, at the time a%%ointed for the that
%ur%ose, the court that the %erson died intestate, seized of real or %ersonal %ro%erty in
the -slands, lea0in/ no heirs or %erson entitled to the same and no sufficient cause is
sho'n to the contrary, the court shall order and decree that the estate of the deceased
in these -slands, after the %ayment of 1ust debts and char/es, shall escheatO
Bscheat, under sections ,50 and ,51, is a %roceedin/ 'hereby the real and %ersonal
%ro%erty of a deceased %erson become the %ro%erty of the State u%on his death
'ithout lea0in/ any 'ill or le/al heirs. -t is not an ordinary action contem%lated by
section 1 of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, but a s%ecial %roceedin/ in accordance 'ith
the said section. he %roceedin/, as %ro0ided by section ,50, should be commenced
by %etition and not by com%laint.
-n a s%ecial %roceedin/ for escheat under section ,50 and ,51 the %etitioner is not the
sole and e5clusi0e interested %arty. "ny %erson alle/in/ to ha0e a direct ri/ht or
interest in the %ro%erty sou/ht to be escheated is liAe'ise and interest and necessary
%arty and may a%%ear and o%%ose the %etition for escheat. -n the %resent case the
$ole/io de San )ose, -nc., and $arlos ?oun/ a%%eared alle/in/ to ha0e a material
interest in the =acienda de San Pedro unasaI and the former because it claims to be
the e5clusi0e o'ner of the hacienda, and the latter because he claim to be the lessee
thereof under a contract le/ality entered 'ith the former.
"ccordin/ to the alle/ations of the %etition, the %etitioners base their ri/ht to the
escheat u%on the fact that the tem%oral %ro%erties of the &ather of the Society of
)esus, amon/ them, the =acienda de San Pedro unasan, 'ere confiscated by order
of the Lin/ of S%ain and %assed from then on to the $ro'n of S%ain. -f the hacienda
de San Pedro unasan,, 'hich is the only %ro%erty sou/ht to be escheated and
ad1udicated to the munici%ality of San Pedro, has already %assed to the o'nershi% of
the $ommon'ealth of the Phili%%ines, it is e0ident that the %etitioners cannot claim
that the same be escheated to the said munici%ality, because it is no lon/er the case
of real %ro%erty o'ned by a deceased %erson 'ho has not left any heirs or %erson
'ho may le/ality claim it, these bein/ the conditions re:uired by section ,50 and
'ithout 'hich a %etition for escheat should not lie from the moment the hacienda 'as
confiscated by the Lin/dom of S%ain, the same ceased to be the %ro%erty of the
children of Bsteban <odri/uez de &i/ueroa, the $ole/io de San )ose or the )esuit
&ather, and became the %ro%erty of the $ommon'ealth of the Phili%%ines by 0irtue of
the transfer under the reaty of Paris, alle/ed in the %etition.
7$!&51& 1"5 vs. !$1C 49 )"7"4
9a0ts'
his in0ol0es 'hat is %robably no' a 0aluable lot in 9a0ao 'hose o'ner, 9omina
Farcia, left for $hina 'ith her entire family in 1+27 and ne0er returned.
he s%ouses $ornelia Pizarro and #altazar Farcia, durin/ their lifetime, 'ere
residents of 9a0ao. "s they 'ere childless, they ado%ted 9omin/a Farcia 'ho
e0entually married a $hinaman, an Sen/ alias Sen/ ?a%, 'ith 'hom she had three
children, Kicenta, 2ariano, and Luis. -n 1+27, they emi/rated to $anton, $hina.
"ccordin/ to the %etitioner, 9omin/a Farcia died intestate in 1+55. She left in the
Phili%%ines a 1,+**8s:uare8meter lot on $la0eria Street, o'nsite of 9a0ao, 9istrict of
9a0ao, re/istered in her name. Since her de%arture for $hina 'ith her family, neither
she, nor her husband, nor any of their children has returned to the Phili%%ines to claim
the lot.
he contro0ersy centers on 'hether 9omin/a's dau/hter, Kicenta an, is ali0e in
$hina or in =on/Aon/, as alle/ed by Pizarro 'ho tried to %ro0e it throu/hJ (1)
su%%osed %ictures of the missin/ heirI (2) an B5tra1udicial Settlement and "d1udication
of 9omin/a's Bstate alle/edly e5ecuted by Kicenta in =on/Aon/ on 2ay 2,, 1+**I
and (7) a S%ecial Po'er of "ttorney that she su%%osedly si/ned (thumbmarAed) in
fa0or of Pizarro on the same date also in =on/Aon/.
Pizarro testified that his aunt $ornelia Pizarro /a0e him the %a%ers %ertainin/ to the
land and told him to taAe care of it before she died in 1+7*.
;ith res%ect to the ar/ument that only the <e%ublic of the Phili%%ines, re%resented by
the Solicitor8Feneral, may file the escheat %etition under Section 1, <ule +1 of the
<e0ised (1+*@) <ules of $ourt, the "%%ellate $ourt correctly ruled that the case did
not come under <ule +1 because the %etition 'as filed on Se%tember 12,1+*2, 'hen
the a%%licable rule 'as still <ule +2 of the 1+@0 <ules of $ourt 'hich %ro0idedJ
Sec. 1. ,hen and by whom,petition filed.X;hen a %erson dies intestate, seized of
real or %ersonal %ro%erty in the Phili%%ines, lea0in/ no heirs or %erson by la' entitled
to the same, the municipality or city 'here the deceased last resided, if he resided in
the Phili%%ines, or the municipality or city in 'hich he had estate if he resided out of
the Phili%%ines, may file a %etition in the court of first instance of the %ro0ince settin/
forth the facts, and %rayin/ that the estate of the deceased be declared escheated.
<ule +1 of the <e0ised rules of $ourt, 'hich %ro0ides that only the <e%ublic of the
Phili%%ines, throu/h the Solicitor Feneral, may commence escheat %roceedin/s, did
not taAe effect until )anuary 1, 1+*@. "lthou/h the escheat %roceedin/s 'ere still
%endin/ then, the <e0ised <ules of $ourt could not be a%%lied to the %etition because
to do so 'ould 'orA in1ustice to the $ity of 9a0ao. <ule 1@@ of the 1+*@ <ules of
$ourt contains this 6sa0in/6 clauseJ
hese rules shall taAe effect on )anuary 1, 1+*@. hey shall /o0ern all cases brou/ht
after they taAe effect, and also all further %roceedin/s in cases %endin/, except to the
extent that in the opinion of the court, their application would not be feasible or would
work inustice, in 'hich e0ent the former %rocedure shall a%%ly.
he $ourt of "%%eals should ha0e dismissed the a%%eal of Kicenta an and <amon
Pizarro earlier because the records sho' that Kicenta 'as ne0er a %arty in the
escheat %roceedin/s. Kicenta an, if she still e5ists, 'as ne0er ser0ed 'ith summons
e5tra8territorially under Section 1,, <ule 1@ of the <ules of $ourt. She ne0er a%%eared
in the trial court by herself, or counsel and ne0er filed a %leadin/ therein, hence, she
ne0er submitted to the court's 1urisdiction.
B0ery action must be %rosecuted and defended in the name of the real %arty8in8
interest. <amon Pizarro, the alle/ed administrator of 9omin/a Farcia's %ro%erty, 'as
not a real %arty in interest. =e had no %ersonality to o%%ose the escheat %etition.
he $ourt of "%%eals did not err in affirmin/ the trial court's rulin/ that 9omin/a
Farcia and her heirs may be %resumed dead in the escheat %roceedin/s as they are,
in effect, %roceedin/s to settle her estate. -ndeed, 'hile a %etition instituted for the
sole %ur%ose of securin/ a 1udicial declaration that a %erson is %resum%ti0ely dead
cannot be entertained if that 'ere the only :uestion or matter in0ol0ed in the case, the
courts are not barred from declarin/ an absentee %resum%ti0ely dead as an incident
of, or in connection 'ith, an action or %roceedin/ for the settlement of the intestate
estate of such absentee.
Petition denied.
R&.%8L$! 49 1(& .($L$..$5&S vs. !4%R1 49 9$RS1 $5S1"5!& 49 :"5$L",
8R"5!( B$$$Q
&actsJ
Pursuant to Section 2 of "ct .o. 7+7*, other'ise Ano'n as the Cnclaimed #alance
La', some 71 banAs includin/ herein %ri0ate res%ondent Pres. <o5as <ural #anA
for'arded to the reasurer of the Phili%%ines in )anuary of 1+*3 se%arate statements
under oath by their res%ecti0e mana/in/ officers of all de%osits and credits held by
them in fa0or, or in the names of such de%ositors or creditors Ano'n to be dead, or
'ho ha0e not been heard from, or 'ho ha0e not made further de%osits or 'ithdra'als
durin/ the %recedin/ ten years or more. -n the s'orn statement submitted by %ri0ate
res%ondent #anA, only t'o (2) names a%%earedJ )esus ?dirin 'ith a balance of
P12*.5@ and Leonora rum%eta 'ith a de%osit of P*2.+1.
hereafter, or on )uly 25, 1+*3, the <e%ublic of the Phili%%ines instituted before the
$&- of 2anila a com%laint for escheat a/ainst the aforesaid 71 banAs, includin/ herein
%ri0ate res%ondent. LiAe'ise named defendants therein 'ere the indi0idual de%ositors
and4or creditors re%orted in the s'orn statements and listed in "nne5 6"6 of the
com%laint.
-ssuesJ
1. ;hether or not Pres. <o5as <ural #anA is a real %arty in interest in the escheat
%roceedin/s or in $i0il $ase .o. ,7,0, of the $ourt of &irst -nstance of 2anila. ?BS
2. ;hether or not Section 2(b), <ule @ of the <e0ised <ules of $ourt on 0enue,
liAe'ise, /o0erns escheat %roceedin/s instituted by the <e%ublic in the $ourt of &irst
-nstance of 2anila. .(
<atioJ
" 6real %arty in interest6 has been defined as the %arty 'ho 'ould be benefitted or
in1ured by the 1ud/ment of the suit or the %arty entitled to a0ail of the suit. here can
be no doubt that %ri0ate res%ondent banA falls under this definition for the escheat of
the dormant de%osits in fa0or of the /o0ernment 'ould necessarily de%ri0e said banA
of the use of such de%osits. -t is in this sense that it stands to be 6in1ured by the
1ud/ment of the suitI6 and it is for this reason that Section 7 of "ct .o. 7+7*
s%ecifically %ro0ides that the banA shall be 1oined as a %arty in the action for escheat,
thusJ
Section 7. ;hene0er the "ttorney Feneral shall be informed of such unclaimed
balances, he shall commence an action or actions in the name of the Peo%le of the
Phili%%ines in the $ourt of &irst -nstance of the %ro0ince 'here the banA is located, in
which shall be oined as parties the banA and such creditors or de%ositors. "ll or any
member of such creditors or de%ositors or banAs, may be included in one action.
(Bm%hasis su%%lied.)
"nent the second issue raised, suffice it to say that Section 2(b) of <ule @ of the
<e0ised <ules of $ourt cannot /o0ern escheat %roceedin/s %rinci%ally because said
section refers to %ersonal actions. Bscheat %roceedin/s are actions in rem 'hich must
be brou/ht in the %ro0ince or city 'here the rem in this case the dormant de%osits, is
located.
($ecilleDs %art
(Leo)
Ru-es 92- 9
.ase B?
5ar+o v ./+-. ";er+0an L+<e $nsuran0e !o.
&actsJ
2rs. "le1andra Santos82ario 'as issued by the Phili%%ine "merican Life
-nsurance $o. a life insurance %olicy under a 208yr endo'ment %lan '4 a face 0alue of
P5L 'herein she desi/nated her husband 9elfin .ario and son Brnesto .ario, as her
irre0ocable beneficiaries. She a%%lied for a loan on the %olicy for school e5%enses of
her son '4 consent of husband. -nsurance $om%any denied a%%lication as it lacAs
court authorization in a com%etent /uardianshi% %roceedin/.
2rs. .ario surrendered the %olicy U demanded its cash 0alue. -nsurance $o denied
on same /round. S%s .ario brou/ht suit a/ainst -nsurance $o.
-nsurance $o alle/es that inasmuch as the %olicy loan a%%lication U the
surrender of the %olicy in0ol0ed acts of dis%osition U alienation of the %ro%erty ri/hts of
the minor, said acts are not 'ithin the %o'ers of the le/al administrator hence mere
consent /i0en by the father8/uardian for U in behalf of the minor son '4o any court
authority 'as not a sufficient com%liance of the la'.
-ssueJ
;(. %olicy loan a%%lication U surrender of %olicy in0ol0ed acts of
dis%osition U alienation of the %ro%erty ri/hts of the minor or mere acts of
administration or mana/ement.
=eldJ
Policy loan a%%lication U surrender of %olicy in0ol0ed acts of dis%osition U
alienation of the %ro%erty ri/hts of the minor. Said acts in0ol0e incurrin/ or termination
of contractual obli/ations. )udicial authorization is necessary. "s le/al administrator,
the father or mother can %erform only acts of administration or mana/ement. Parents
ha0e no authority to carry out acts of dis%osition or alienation of the childDs real or
%ersonal %ro%erty 'ithout 1udicial authorization.
.ase 7?
)a;asa La<ar,a, et a-. v. 8runo La<ar,a
&actsJ
#runo Lafor/a, defendant, admits that %arcels of land the sub1ect matter of
the claim belon/ to %laintiffs but alle/es that he is in %ossession of them throu/h
deli0ery of %laintiff 9amasa Lafor/a on a mort/a/e. rial court ordered defendant to
deli0er land u%on bein/ reimbursed.
<ecord discloses that a/reement 'as e5ecuted solely U e5clusi0ely by
%laintiff 9amasa Lafor/a, /randmother of other %laintiffs 'ho are still minors. 9amasa
Lafor/a 'as not the le/al re%resentati0e of the said minors at the time of the
e5ecution of the a/reement U e0idently acted merely as their /randmother.
-ssueJ
;(. /rand%arents can mort/a/e %ro%erty of minors.
=eldJ
" /randmother of minor children actin/ merely as such or e0en as /uardian
ad litem has no authority to mort/a/e %ro%erty belon/in/ to minor children. "
mort/a/e e5ecuted by her is 0oid U does not bind the children.
)ud/ment a%%ealed from is re0ersed in so far as it declares that the %laintiff
minors must %ay the sum to defendant. he ri/ht is reser0ed to defendant to
%rosecute his claim a/ainst 9amasa Lafor/a in manner U form %ro0ided by la'.
.ase C
Le*es;a (er;anos v. !astro
&actsJ
"nacleta $ortes Kda. 9e $astro filed an ob1ection in a land re/istration
%roceedin/ 'herein eodoro Sison sou/ht to ha0e his title re/istered. Later on
con0inced of her ri/ht, "mbrosio Sison, 'ho had ac:uired the ri/hts of his brother
eodoro, entered into an a/reement '4 her 'hereby she U her sons &rancisco U
&ernando $astro, 'ai0ed their ri/hts to the land in consideration of P1@L. "mbrosio
sold his ri/ht to Ledesma #rothers.
(%%onents8a%%ellants -nes, $once%cion and 9olores $astro, are sisters of
&rancisco and &ernando $astro U children of "nacleta $ortes Kda. 9e $astro, 'ho at
the time of a/reement 'ere minors under the /uardianshi% of their mother.
-ssueJ
;(. a transaction may be made by a /uardian '4o com%etent authority.
=eldJ
"t the time the transaction 'as made, the o%%onents8a%%ellants 'ere
minors U sub1ect to /uardianshi% U inasmuch as it does not a%%ear that at the time
the a/reement 'as entered into their /uardian U mother acted in behalf of said minor
children, not that she had authority from the court to that end, as re:uired by section
5*+ of the $ode of $i0il Procedure, that a/reement is null U 0oid in so far as said
minors are concerned, U does not affect their ri/hts.
.ase 9
Reyes v. Lu0+a :+-a,ros 8arretto-)atu
&actsJ
his is an action to reco0er H share in the fish%ond bein/ the share of irso
<eyesDs 'ards as minor heirs of the deceased Salud #arretto, 'ido' of irso.
#ibliano #arretto 'as married to 2aria Ferardo 'ho ac:uired a 0ast estate
durin/ their lifetime. ;hen #ibliano #arretto died, he left his share of these %ro%erties
to Salud #arretto, mother of %laintiffDs 'ards, and Lucia 2ila/ros #arretto. he
usufruct of the fish%ond 'as reser0ed for his 'ido', 2aria Ferardo. She 'as
a%%ointed administratri5 U %re%ared a %ro1ect of %artition a%%ro0ed by $&-. Salud
#arretto tooA immediate %ossession of her share U secured issuance of titles in her
name.
;hen 2aria Ferardo died, it 'as disco0ered that she had e5ecuted 2 'illsJ
first, institutin/ Salud U 2ila/ros as her heirsI second, re0oAin/ the first U institutin/ all
her %ro%erties in fa0or of 2ila/ros #arretto alone. Later 'ill 'as allo'ed. =a0in/ lost
fi/ht for a share in the estate of 2aria Ferardo, %laintiff falls bacA u%on remnant of
estate of deceased #ibiano #arretto in usufruct to his 'ido'.
9efendant contends that the %ro1ect of %artition from '4c Salud ac:uired the
fish%ond in :uestion is 0oid ab inito U Salud did not ac:uire any 0alid title thereto, U
that the court did not ac:uire any 1urisdiction of the %erson of the defendant 'ho 'as
then a minor.
=eldJ
Partition 'herein an instituted heir 'ho 'as later found not to be the
decedentDs child 'as included is 0alid.
" distribution in the decedentDs 'ill made accordin/ to his 'ill should be res%ected.
he fact that one of the distributes 'as a minor at the time the court issued the decree
of distribution does not im%ly that the court had no 1urisdiction to enter the decree of
distribution. he %roceedin/ for the settlement of a decedentDs estate is a %roceedin/
in rem. -t is bindin/ on the distributee 'ho 'as re%resented by her mother as
/uardian.
.ase 'D
7+saya, et a-. v. Su,u+tan, et a-.
&actsJ
Su/uitan brou/ht suit a/ainst )uana #ayaua for re%urchase of land. he
action ended in a com%romise 'hereby )uana #ayaua a/reed to recon0ey the land.
$om%romise 'as a%%ro0ed by the court. "s #ayaua refused later to acce%t the
re%urchase %rices, the deed of recon0eyance 'as ordered e5ecuted by the $lerA of
$ourt. "%%ellants, children U heirs of the late 2odesto Kisaya, initiated the %resent
action to ha0e the com%romise U 1ud/ment set aside insofar as it concerns their H
interest inherited from the deceased father.
=eldJ
;hen the ori/inal %urchaser of the land, 2odesto Kisaya, dies his children
immediately ac:uired his interest therein by o%eration of la'I U that interest 'as
inde%endent of that of their mother )uana #ayaua. he ri/ht of re%urchase had to be
e5ercised a/ainst a%%ellant as 'ell as a/ainst their mother. .ot ha0in/ done so, the
com%romise as 'ell as the 1ud/ment by consent cannot affect the ri/ht of a%%ellants,
'ho 'ere not %arties to the suit. " com%romise has al'ays been deemed e:ui0alent
to an alienation U not administration.
L+n*a+n v. !ourt o< "22ea-s
&actsJ
;hile %etitioners 'ere still minors, they already o'ned a %arcel of land
re/istered under their names. heir mother 9olores, actin/ as their /uardian sold the
land for P2,000 to the res%ondents S%ouses -la. he res%ondents %urchased the lot
u%on assurance of their counsel that the %ro%erty could be sold 'ithout the 'ritten
authority of the court since its 0alue 'as less than P2,000. Petitioners filed a
com%laint for annulment of the sale of the re/istered land, contendin/ that the sale
'as null and 0oid because it 'as made 'ithout 1udicial authority or court a%%ro0al. (n
the other hand, the res%ondents ar/ued that there 'as no need to obtain %rior court
a%%ro0al since the 0alue of the %ro%erty 'as less than P2,000 and that the ri/ht of the
%etitioners to rescind the contract has already %rescribed. he <e/ional rial $ourt
declared the sale null and 0oid but the $ourt of "%%eals re0ersed the lo'er court
decision.
-ssueJ
;hether or not a %arent, actin/ as administrator of the %ro%erty of his4her minor
children can dis%ose of the childrenDs %ro%erty 'ithout any 1udicial a%%ro0al.
=eldJ
.o. $ourt a%%ro0al is necessary because the <ules of $ourt %ro0ide that the
%arent, actin/ as le/al administrator of his4her minor childrenDs %ro%erty only has
%o'ers of %ossession and mana/ement. Prior to any sale, mort/a/e, encumbrance or
other dis%osition of %ro%erty, court authority and a%%ro0al are necessary re/ardless of
the amount in0ol0ed.
he s%ousesD alle/ation that they are %urchasers in /ood faith is not credible
as they Ane' from the start that their 0endor, the %etitionersD mother, could not 0alidly
con0ey to them the %ro%erty of her minor children 'ithout %rior court a%%ro0al.
5ery v. Lorenzo
&actsJ
he real %ro%erty in :uestion %re0iously belon/ed to &lorentino &errer and
his siblin/s "/ueda, omasa, Sil0estra and 2eliton. ;hen &lorentino died, a deed of
absolute sale 'as e5ecuted in fa0or of Leoncio Lorenzo, the child of "/ueda by
"/ueda, omasa and the children of 2eliton. Leoncio became a co8o'ner and
ac:uired the %artici%ation of the sellers e:ui0alent to Z undi0ided %art of the land.
Sil0estra, 'ho did not sell her [ undi0ided %ortion, u%on her demise %assed her share
to her nearest relati0es, the children of her sister omasa.
#ien0enida, the s%ouse of Leoncio, des%ite this Ano'led/e, mana/ed to sell
the %ro%erty to .ery 'ithout the consent of the successors8in8interests of Sil0estra. -n
the /uardianshi% %roceedin/s, #ien0enida misre%resented that the %arcel of land
belon/ed to her minor children. hus, she 'as /ranted authority to sell it.
-n the /uardianshi% %roceedin/s that 'ere instituted, the lo'er court
declared that it did not ac:uire 1urisdiction o0er the minors 'ho 'ere not notified of the
%roceedin/s. )urisdiction 'as liAe'ise not ac:uired o0er the %ro%erty of the minors as
the in0entory submitted failed to declare that the minors had any real %ro%erty. hus,
the sale of the %ro%erty to .ery cannot be considered as 0alid.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the court 0alidly ac:uired 1urisdiction o0er the /uardianshi%
%roceedin/s.
=eldJ
he court ne0er 0alidly ac:uired 1urisdiction o0er the %roceedin/s. "ccordin/ to the
<ules of $ourt, ser0ice of notice u%on the minor is re:uired if he or she is abo0e 1@
years of a/e. ;ithout such notice, the court ac:uires no 1urisdiction to a%%oint a
/uardian. he 1urisdictional infirmity in this case 'as too %atent to be o0ercome. -t is
the duty of the State, actin/ as %arens %atriae to %rotect the ri/hts of %ersons or
indi0iduals 'ho because of a/e or inca%acity are in an unfa0orable %osition, 0is8\80is
other %arties.
(n the other hand, %etitioner .ery, a member of the bar could not ha0e
been una'are that his 0endor, #ien0enida could not sell to him more than she
ri/htfully could dis%ose of.
3orost+a,a v. Sarte
&actsJ
.ine days %rior to the institution of an action for reco0ery of a sum of money
a/ainst defendant Sarte, a %etition for /uardianshi% 'as filed 'ith the lo'er court in
fa0or of the defendant due to her incom%etence to mana/e her estate by reason of
her %hysical and mental inca%acity. he %etition for /uardianshi% 'as /ranted by the
court.
-t a%%ears from the e0idence %resented that durin/ all the %roceedin/s in
the case for reco0ery of money, from the time of the filin/ of the com%laint to the
rendition of the 1ud/ment, the defendant 'as %hysically and mentally unfit to mana/e
her affairs. -t liAe'ise a%%ears that since no summons and notices of the %roceedin/s
'ere ser0ed u%on her and her /uardian because no /uardian 'as then a%%ointed, the
court ne0er ac:uired 1urisdiction o0er her %erson.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the %roceedin/s a/ainst defendant is null and 0oid for lacA of
1urisdiction o0er her %erson.
=eldJ
he %roceedin/s are null and 0oid. he a%%earance of an attorney in behalf
of the defendant before the lo'er court created a %resum%tion that the attorney had
authority. =o'e0er, this dis%utable %resum%tion 'as rebutted by a court order
declarin/ the defendant %hysically and mentally unfit to mana/e her estate. "side
from that, defendant had ne0er been in court e5ce%t 'hen her /uardian filed a motion
to :uash all the %roceedin/s due to lacA of 1urisdiction. -t is the duty of the court to set
aside all the %roceedin/s, taAe the necessary ste%s to ac:uire 1urisdiction and /rant a
ne' trial 'hen it a%%ears that after 1ud/ment, the lacA of 1urisdiction 'as clearly
sho'n and no 'ai0er 'as e5ecuted.
9ran0+s0o v. !ourt o< "22ea-s
&actsJ
&eliciano &rancisco 'as the duly a%%ointed /uardian of the incom%etent Bstefania
San Pedro. Pela/io, a first cousin of Bstefania %etitioned the court for the remo0al of
&eliciano as the /uardian and his a%%ointment instead. Pela/io claimed that &eliciano
failed to submit an in0entory of the estate and render an accountin/. he court
ordered the retirement of &eliciano as /uardian due to his old a/e and re:uired him to
nominate a re%lacement. he court thereafter /ranted the e5ecution %endin/ a%%eal of
its decision and a%%ointed Pela/io as the ne' /uardian des%ite the fact that he 'as
fi0e years older than the %re0ious /uardian. he $ourt of "%%eals affirmed the
decision of the lo'er court.
-ssueJ
;hether or not the lo'er court committed /ra0e abuse of discretion by orderin/ the
remo0al of &eliciano as /uardian due to his ad0anced a/e.
=eldJ
he lo'er court correctly ordered the retirement of &eliciano as /uardian. "
/uardianshi% %roceedin/ is instituted for the benefit and 'elfare of the 'ard. -n the
selection of a /uardian, the court may consider the financial situation, the %hysical
condition, the morals, character and conduct, and the %resent and %ast history of a
%ros%ecti0e a%%ointee as 'ell as the %robability of his bein/ able to e5ercise the
%o'ers and duties of /uardian for the full %eriod durin/ 'hich /uardianshi% 'ill be
necessary. &eliciano, at the a/e of ,2 cannot fulfill the res%onsibilities of a /uardian
anymore, as e0idenced by his delay in accountin/ and in0entory of the 'ardDs
%ro%erty. o sustain %etitioner as /uardian 'ould be detrimental to the 'ard. ;hile
a/e alone is not a controllin/ criterion in determinin/ a %ersonDs fitness or :ualification
to be a%%ointed or be retained as /uardian, it may be a factor for consideration.
%y an* >ar*e-eza v. !ourt o< "22ea-s
&actsJ
9r. Brnesto )ardeleza suffered a stroAe 'hich left him comatose. =is son eodoro
u%on learnin/ that a real estate %ro%erty of his %arents 'as about to be sold, filed a
%etition in court claimin/ that there 'as a need for the a%%ointment of a /uardian to
administer his fatherDs %ro%erties due to his %resent %hysical and mental inca%acity. "
fe' days later, Filda, the s%ouse of Brnesto filed a %etition re/ardin/ the declaration
of inca%acity of Brnesto, assum%tion of sole %o'ers of administration of con1u/al
%ro%erties and authorization to sell the same. "ccordin/ to her, medical treatment and
hos%italization e5%enses 'ere %ilin/ u%, thus re:uirin/ the need to ur/ently sell real
estate %ro%erty. he lo'er court /ranted FildaDs %etition, declarin/ Brnesto
inca%acitated and authorized her to assume the role of administrator of the con1u/al
%ro%erties and sell real %ro%erties. Pendin/ the motion for reconsideration filed by
eodoro, Filda 'as able to sell a %arcel of land belon/in/ to the con1u/al %ro%erties to
her dau/hter Flenda. he lo'er court subse:uently a%%ro0ed the deed of absolute
sale. =o'e0er, the $ourt of "%%eals re0ersed the decision.
-ssueJ
;hether or not Filda )ardeleza as the 'ife of Brnesto )ardeleza, 'ho suffered a
stroAe that rendered him comatose, may assume sole %o'ers of administration of the
con1u/al %ro%erty under "rticle 12@ of the &amily $ode and dis%ose of a %arcel of land
'ith the a%%ro0al of the court in a summary %roceedin/.
=eldJ
"rticle 12@ of the &amily $ode does not a%%ly in the case at bar. ;hen the non8
consentin/ s%ouse is inca%acitated or incom%etent to /i0e consent, the %ro%er remedy
is a 1udicial /uardianshi% %roceedin/ under <ule +7 of the <ules of $ourt. he s%ouse
'ho desires to sell real %ro%erty as an administrator of the con1u/al %ro%erty must
obser0e the %rocedure %ro0ided for in <ule +5 of the <ules of $ourt, not the summary
1udicial %roceedin/s under the &amily $ode.
he trial court did not com%ly 'ith the %rocedure under the <e0ised <ules of $ourt. "
notice of the %etition 'as not ser0ed to the inca%acitated s%ouse. .either 'as he
re:uired to sho' cause 'hy the %etition should be /ranted. "bsent an o%%ortunity to
be heard, the decision rendered by the trial court is 0oid for lacA of due %rocess.

Specpro Digests

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Specpro Digests

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ateneolaw3B Specpro Digests Page 1 of 86

You might also like