Jul 17, 2012

Sebial v. Sebial Digest


G.R. No. L-23419

Facts of the Case:
 Gelacio Sebial died in 1943, he had 3 children with this 1st wife Reoncia (Roberta's mother) and 6 other children with his 2nd wife Dolores, (Benjamina's mother). In 1960, BEjamina filed for the settlement of her father's estate and her appointment as administrator. Thisd petition was oppsed by Roberta on the ground that said estate had already been apportioned and that she should be the one appointed as administrator and not Benjamina. The Court appointed Benjamina and found that alleged partition was invalid and ineffective. So the letters of administration were issued and a notice to the creditors was issue don the same date. The oppositors motion for reconsideration was denied. For the possibility of an amicale settlement, the court ordered both sides to give a complete list of the porperties of te decedent with segregation for each marriage.
On Nov. 1961, the lower court approved the administrator's inventory (second one) or six months from the appointment. Roberta them moved for the motion reocnsideration alleging as ground that the court has no jusridiction to approve the inventory as it was files beyiind the 3-month period. The Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court.
Issue: Did the court lose jurisdiction to approve the inventory which was made 6 months after the appointment?
Ruling. NO. Under section 1 of Rule 83 of the Rules of Court, the prescribed three-month period is not mandatory. Once a petition for the issuance of letters of administration is filed with the proper court and the publication of the notice of hearing is complied with, said court acquires jurisdiction over the estate and retains such until the probate proceedings is closed. Hence, even if the inventory was filed only after the three-month period, this delay will not deprive the probate court of its jurisdiction to approve it. However, under section 2 of Rule 82 of the Rules of Court, such unexplained delay can be a ground for an administrator's removal.

No comments:

Post a Comment