THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 116835 March 5, 1998

ANTONIETTA GARCIA VDA. DE CHUA, petitioner,
vs.
COURT OF APPEAL !"#c$a% E$&h' D$($)$o*+, HON. ,APAL M. GUIANI, RTC, -ra*ch
1., 1/'h ,01$c$a% R#&$o*, Co'a2a'o C$'3, a*1 FLORITA A. VALLE,O, a) A14$*$)'ra'r$5
o6 'h# E)'a'# o6 'h# %a'# Ro2#r'o L. Ch0a, respondents.

7APUNAN, J.:
Assailed before us in this Appeal by Certiorari under Rule 4 of the Rules of !ourt is the
de"ision of the !ourt of Appeals in !A#$R Sp. No. %%&'&, pro(ul)ated on &* April &**4
affir(in) the de"ision of the Re)ional Trial !ourt, +ran"h &4, of !otabato !ity in Spe"ial
,ro"edure !ase No. %%&.
As "ulled fro( the re"ords, the follo-in) fa"ts have been established by eviden"e.
Durin) his lifeti(e, Roberto /i( !hua lived out of -edlo"0 -ith private respondent 1lorita A.
Valle2o fro( &*3' up to &*4&. Out of this union, the "ouple be)ot t-o ille)iti(ate "hildren,
na(ely, Roberto Rafson Alon5o and Rudyard ,ride Alon5o.
On 64 7ay &**6, Roberto !hua died intestate in Davao !ity.
On 6 8uly &**6, private respondent filed -ith the Re)ional Trial !ourt of !otabato !ity a
,etition
1
-hi"h is reprodu"ed hereunder.
IN R9. ,9TITION 1OR D9!/ARATION
O1 H9IRSHI,, $:ARDIANSHI, OV9R
TH9 ,9RSONS AND ,RO,9RTI9S O1
7INORS RO+9RT RA1SON A/ON;O S,. ,RO!. NO< %%&
and R:D=ARD ,RID9 A/ON;O, all
surna(ed !H:A and ISS:AN!9 O1
/9TT9RS O1 AD7INISTRATION.
1/ORITA A/ON;O VA//98O,
,etitioner
PETITION
!O79S NO> the petitioner assisted by "ounsel and unto this Honorable !ourt (ost
respe"tfully states.
&. That she is of le)al a)e, 1ilipino, (arried but separated fro( her husband and
residin) at ?ue5on Avenue, !otabato !ity, ,hilippines@
6. That so(eti(e fro( &*3' up to and until late &*4& your petitioner lived -ith
Roberto /i( !hua as husband and -ife and out of said union they be)ot t-o A6B
"hildren, na(ely, Robert Rafson Alon5o !hua -ho -as born in $eneral Santos !ity
on April 64, &*33 and Rudyard ,ride Alon5o !hua -ho -as born in Davao !ity on
Au)ust %', &*34. A CeroC "opy of the birth "ertifi"ate of ea"h "hild is hereto atta"hed
as anneC DAD and D+D, respe"tively.
%. That the afore(entioned "hildren -ho are still (inors today are both stayin) -ith
herein petitioner at her address at ?ue5on Avenue, !otabato !ity@
4. That Roberto /i( !hua, father of the above#(entioned (inors, died intestate on
7ay 64, &**6 in Davao !ity.
. That the afore(entioned de"eased left properties both real and personal -orth
,,''','''.'' "onsistin) of the follo-in).
aB /ot in Ea0ar, !otabato !ity "overed by T!T
No. T#&64% -ith an area of 6*' sF. (. esti(ated at ,','''.''
bB /ot in Ea0ar, !otabato !ity "overed by T!T
No. T#&64%4 -ith an area of %6% sF. (. ','''.''
"B /ot in Davao !ity "overed by T!T
No. T#&6G4% -ith an area of %'% sF. (. ','''.''
dB /ot in Davao !ity "overed by T!T
No. T#&6G44 -ith an area of %'% sF. (. ','''.''
eB Residential house in !otabato !ity valued at %','''.''
fB Residential house in Davao !ity valued at G'','''.''
)B !ar, !olt /an"er -ith 7otor No. 4$%%#% A1G%*% 6&','''.''
hB !olt, $alant Super Saloon -ith 7otor
No. 4$%3#$+'&G 4,'''.''
iB !ar, !olt $alant -ith 7otor No. 4$6#6D3644 &&','''.''
2B Reo Isu5u Du(p Tru"0 -ith 7otor
No. DAG4'#4%4G% %','''.''
0B Hino Du(p Tru"0 -ith 7otor No. 9D&''#T43&44 %','''.''
lB Sto"0holdin)s in various "orporations -ith par value
esti(ated at %,%%,'''.''
Total ,,''','''.''
G. That de"eased Roberto /i( !hua died sin)le and -ithout le)iti(ate des"endants
or as"endants, hen"e, the above na(ed (inors Robert Rafson Alon5o !hua and
Rudyard ,ride Alon5o !hua, his "hildren -ith herein petitioner shall su""eed to the
entire estate of the de"eased. AArti"le *44 of the !ivil !ode of the ,hilippinesB.
3. That the na(es, a)es and residen"es of the relatives of said (inors are the
follo-in), to -it.
Names Relationship Ages Residence
&. !arlos !hua :n"le G' ?ue5on Avenue,
!otabato !ity
6. Aida !hua Auntie Rosary Hei)hts,
!otabato !ity
%. Ro(ulo :y :n"le 4' "<o Overseas
1ishin) 9Cporation
!o. In"., 7atina,
Davao !ity
G. That "onsiderin) the fa"t that the afore(entioned (inors by operation of la- are
to su""eed to the entire estate of Roberto /i( !hua under the provisions of Arti"le
*44 of the Ne- !ivil !ode of the ,hilippines, it is ne"essary that for the prote"tion of
the ri)hts and interest of Robert Rafson Alon5o !hua and Rudyard ,ride Alon5o
!hua, both (inors and heirs of de"eased Roberto /i( !hua, a )uardian over the
persons and properties of said (inors be appointed by this Honorable !ourt.
3. That herein petitioner bein) the (other and natural )uardian of said (inors is also
"o(petent and -illin) to a"t as the )uardian of (inors Robert Rafson Alon5o !hua
and Rudyard ,ride Alon5o !hua both stayin) and livin) -ith her@ that petitioner
possesses all the Fualifi"ations and none of the disFualifi"ations of a )uardian.
>H9R91OR9, pre(ises "onsidered, it is (ost respe"tfully prayed.
&. That, upon proper noti"e and hearin), an order be issued de"larin) (inors
RO+9RTO RA1SON A/ON;O !H:A and R:D=ARD ,RID9 A/ON;O !H:A as
heirs to the intestate estate of de"eased RO+9RTO /I7 !H:A@
6. That /etters of Ad(inistration be issued to herein petitioner for the ad(inistration
of the estate of the de"eased RO+9RTO /I7 !H:A@
%. That the petitioner be also appointed the )uardian of the persons and estate of
(inors RO+9RT RA1SON A/ON;O !H:A and R:D=ARD ,RID9 A/ON;O !H:A@
4. That after all the property of de"eased Roberto /i( !hua have been inventoried
and eCpenses and 2ust debts, have been paid, the intestate estate of Roberto /i(
!hua be distributed to its ri)htful heirs, the (inors in this "ase, pursuant to the
provisions of Arti"le *44 of the Ne- !ivil !ode of the ,hilippines.
. And for su"h other reliefs and re(edies this Honorable !ourt (ay "onsider fit and
proper in the pre(ises.
!otabato !ity, ,hilippines, 8une 6*, &**6.
AS)d.B 1/ORITA A/ON;O VA//98O
A,etitionerB
The trial "ourt issued an order settin) the hearin) of the petition on &4 Au)ust &**6 and
dire"ted that noti"e thereof be published in a ne-spaper of )eneral "ir"ulation in the
provin"e of 7a)uindanao and !otabato !ity and or Davao !ity.
On 6& 8uly &**6, herein petitioner Antonietta $ar"ia Vda. de !hua, representin) to be the
survivin) spouse of Roberto !hua, filed a 7otion to Dis(iss
/
on the )round of i(proper
venue. ,etitioner alle)ed that at the ti(e of the de"edentHs death Davao !ity -as his
residen"e, hen"e, the Re)ional Trial !ourt of Davao !ity is the proper foru(.
,rivate respondent filed an opposition to the 7otion to Dis(iss
3
dated 8uly 6', &**6 based
on the follo-in) )rounds.
A&B That this petition is for the )uardianship of the (inor "hildren of the petitioner -ho
are heirs to the estate of the late Roberto /. !hua and under Se"tion &, Rule *6 of
the Rules of !ourt the venue shall be at the pla"e -here the (inor resides@
A6B That the above#na(ed (inors are residents of !otabato !ity.
A%B That the (ovant in this "ase has no personality to intervene nor oppose in the
)rantin) of this petition for the reason that she is a total stran)er to the (inors
Robert Rafson Alon5o and Rudyard ,ride Alon5o, all surna(ed !hua.
A4B That de"eased Roberto /. !hua died a ba"helor. He is the father of the above#
na(ed (inors -ith the petitioner in this "ase@
AB That (ovant<oppositor Antonietta !hua is not the survivin) spouse of the late
Roberto /. !hua but a pretender to the estate of the latter sin"e the de"eased never
"ontra"ted (arria)e -ith any -o(an until he died.
On G Au)ust &**6, private respondent Valle2o filed a 7otion for Ad(ission of an A(ended
,etition
.
Din order that the desi)nation of the "ase title "an properly and appropriately
"apture or "apsuli5e in "lear ter(s the (aterial aver(ents in the body of the pleadin)s@ thus
avoidin) any "onfusion or (is"on"eption of the nature and real intent and purpose of this
petition.D The a(ended petition
5
"ontained identi"al (aterial alle)ations but differed in its
title, thus..
IN R9. ,9TITION 1OR TH9 S9TT/979NT O1 TH9 INT9STAT9 9STAT9 O1
RO+9RTO /. !H:A, D9!/ARATION O1 H9IRSHI,, $:ARDIANSHI, OV9R TH9
,9RSONS AND ,RO,9RTI9S O1 7INORS RO+9RT AND R:D=ARD, all
surna(ed !H:A and ISS:AN!9 O1 /9TT9RS O1 AD7INISTRATION.
1/ORITA A/ON;O VA//98O,
,etitioner.
,ara)raph 4 of the ori)inal petition -as also a(ended to read as follo-s.
4. That Roberto /i( !hua, father of the above(entioned (inors is a resident of
!otabato !ity and died intestate on 7ay 64, &**6 at Davao !ity.
The petition "ontained eCa"tly the sa(e prayers as the ori)inal petition.
,etitioner opposed the (otion to a(end petition alle)in) that at the hearin) of said (otion
on 64 8uly &**6, private respondentHs "ounsel alle)edly ad(itted that the sole intention of
the ori)inal petition -as to se"ure )uardianship over the persons and property of the
(inors.
6
On 6& Au)ust &**6, the trial "ourt issued an Order
8
denyin) the (otion to dis(iss for la"0
of (erit. The "ourt ruled that Antonietta $ar"ia had no personality to file the (otion to
dis(iss not havin) proven her status as -ife of the de"edent. 1urther, the "ourt found that
the a"tual residen"e of the de"eased -as !otabato !ity, and even assu(in) that there -as
"on"urrent venue a(on) the Re)ional Trial !ourts -here the de"edent had resided, the
R.T.!. of !otabato had already ta0en "o)ni5an"e of the settle(ent of the de"edentHs estate
to the eC"lusion of all others. The pertinent portions of the order read.
At the hearin) of the (otion to dis(iss on Au)ust &*, &**6, "ounsel for (ovant
Antonietta $. !hua presented &4 9Chibits in support of her alle)ation that she -as
the la-ful -ife of the de"edent and that the latter resides in Davao !ity at the ti(e of
his death. 9Ch. D&D -as the CeroC "opy of the alle)ed (arria)e "ontra"t bet-een the
(ovant and the petitioner. This "annot be ad(itted in eviden"e on the )round of the
ti(ely ob2e"tion of the "ounsels for petitioner that the best eviden"e is the ori)inal
"opy or authenti"ated "opy -hi"h the (ovant "annot produ"e. 1urther, the "ounsels
for petitioner in opposition presented the follo-in). a "ertifi"ation fro( the /o"al !ivil
Re)istrar "on"erned that no su"h (arria)e "ontra"t -as ever re)istered -ith the(@ a
letter fro( 8ud)e Au)usto +an5ali, the alle)ed person to have sole(ni5ed the
alle)ed (arria)e that he has not sole(ni5ed su"h alle)ed (arria)e. 9Chibit D6D
throu)h D&4D "onsist a(on) others of Transfer !ertifi"ate of Title issued in the na(e
of Roberto /. !hua (arried to Antonietta $ar"ia, and a resident of Davao !ity@
Residen"e !ertifi"ates fro( &*44 and &*4* issued at Davao !ity indi"atin) that he
-as (arried and -as born in !otabato !ity@ In"o(e TaC Returns for &**' and &**&
filed in Davao !ity -here the status of the de"edent -as stated as (arried@ passport
of the de"edent spe"ifyin) that he -as (arried and his residen"e -as Davao !ity.
,etitioner throu)h "ounsels, ob2e"ted to the ad(ission in eviden"e of 9Chibits D6D
throu)h D&4D if the purpose is to establish the truth of the alle)ed (arria)e bet-een
the de"edent and Antonietta $ar"ia. The best eviden"e they said is the (arria)e
"ontra"t. They do not ob2e"t to the ad(ission of said eChibit if the purpose is to sho-
that Davao !ity -as the business residen"e of the de"edent.
,etitioner throu)h "ounsels, presented 9Chibit DAD throu)h DED to support her
alle)ation that the de"edent -as a resident of !otabato !ity@ that he died a ba"helor@
that he be)ot t-o ille)iti(ate "hildren -ith the petitioner as (other. A(on) these
eChibits are In"o(e TaC Returns filed in !otabato !ity fro( &*G4 throu)h &*3*
indi"atin) therein that he -as sin)le@ birth "ertifi"ates of the alle)ed t-o ille)iti(ate
"hildren of the de"edent@ Resident !ertifi"ates of the de"edent issued in !otabato
!ity@ Re)istration !ertifi"ate of Vehi"le of the de"edent sho-in) that his residen"e is
!otabato !ity.
It is "lear fro( the fore)oin) that the (ovant failed to establish the truth of her
alle)ation that she -as the la-ful -ife of the de"edent. The best eviden"e is a valid
(arria)e "ontra"t -hi"h the (ovant failed to produ"e. Transfer !ertifi"ates of Title,
Residen"e !ertifi"ates, passports and other si(ilar do"u(ents "annot prove
(arria)e espe"ially so -hen the petitioner has sub(itted a "ertifi"ation fro( the
/o"al !ivil Re)istrar "on"erned that the alle)ed (arria)e -as not re)istered and a
letter fro( the 2ud)e alle)ed to have sole(ni5ed the (arria)e that he has not
sole(ni5ed said alle)ed (arria)e. !onseFuently, she has no personality to file the
sub2e"t (otion to dis(iss.
On the issue of the residen"e of the de"edent at the ti(e of his death, the de"edent
as a business(an has (any business residen"es fro( different parts of the "ountry
-here he usually stays to supervise and pursue his business ventures. Davao !ity is
one of the(. It "annot be denied that !otabato !ity is his a"tual residen"e -here his
alle)ed ille)iti(ate "hildren also reside.
The pla"e of residen"e of the de"eased in settle(ent of estates, probate of -ill, and
issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration does not "onstitute an ele(ent of 2urisdi"tion
over the sub2e"t (atter. It is (erely "onstitutive of venue A1ule vs. !A, /#4''6,
Nove(ber 6*, &*3GB. 9ven assu(in) that there is "on"urrent venue a(on) the
Re)ional Trial !ourts of the pla"es -here the de"edent has residen"es, the Re)ional
Trial !ourt first ta0in) "o)ni5an"e of the settle(ent of the estate of the de"edent,
shall eCer"ise 2urisdi"tion to the eC"lusion of all other "ourts ASe"tion &, Rule 3%B. It
-as this !ourt -hi"h first too0 "o)ni5an"e of the "ase -hen the petition -as filed on
8uly 6, &**6, do"0eted as Spe"ial ,ro"eedin) No. %%& and an order of publi"ation
issued by this !ourt on 8uly &%, &**6.
>H9R91OR9, in vie- of the fore)oin), the (otion to dis(iss is hereby denied for
la"0 of (erit.
On %& Au)ust &**6, upon (otion of private respondent, the trial "ourt issued an order
appointin) Ro(ulo /i( :y, a first "ousin of the de"eased, as spe"ial ad(inistrator of the
de"edentHs estate.
8
On the sa(e day, the trial "ourt, li0e-ise, issued an Order appointin) 1lorita Valle2o as
)uardian over the persons and properties of the t-o (inor "hildren.
9
Thereafter, petitioner filed a 7otion dated 6 O"tober &**%
19
prayin) that the letters of
ad(inistration issued to Valle2o be re"alled and that ne- letters of ad(inistration be issued
to her. She, li0e-ise, filed a 7otion dated Nove(ber &**%
11
to de"lare the pro"eedin)s a
(istrial. +oth (otions -ere denied by the trial "ourt in its Order dated 66 Nove(ber
&**%.
1/
,etitionerHs (otion for re"onsideration of the order -as denied by the trial "ourt in
an Order dated &% De"e(ber &**%.
13
Assailin) the last t-o orders of the trial "ourt, petitioner filed a petition for certiorari and
prohibition ARule GB -ith the respondent !ourt of Appeals, do"0eted as !A $.R. No. Sp.
%%&'&, alle)in) that the trial "ourt a"ted -ith )rave abuse of dis"retion in.
A&B unilaterally and su((arily "onvertin), if not treatin), the )uardianship
pro"eedin)s into an intestate pro"eedin)@
A6B su((arily hearin) the intestate pro"eedin)s -ithout 2urisdi"tion and -ithout any
noti"e to herein petitioner -hatsoever@ and
A%B issuin) the Fuestioned order AsicB on the alle)ed pretension that herein petitioner
has no personality to intervene in S,/ ,ro". No. %%& Fuestionin) the hi)hly
ano(alous orders pre"ipitately issued ex-parte by the publi" respondent R.T.!.
-ithout noti"e to the petitioners.
,etitioner in the (ain ar)ued that private respondent herself ad(itted in her opposition to
petitionerHs (otion to dis(iss filed in the trial "ourt and in open "ourt that the ori)inal petition
she filed is one for )uardianship@ hen"e, the trial "ourt a"ted beyond its 2urisdi"tion -hen it
issued letters of ad(inistration over the estate of Roberto /. !hua, thereby "onvertin) the
petition into an intestate pro"eedin), -ithout the a(ended petition bein) published in a
ne-spaper of )eneral "ir"ulation as reFuired by Se"tion %, Rule 3*.
The !ourt of Appeals, in its de"ision pro(ul)ated on &* April &**4,
1.
denied the petition
ratio"inatin) that the ori)inal petition filed -as one for )uardianship of the ille)iti(ate
"hildren of the de"eased as -ell as for ad(inistration of his intestate estate. >hile private
respondent (ay have alle)ed in her opposition to the (otion to dis(iss that petition -as for
)uardianship, the fa"t re(ains that the very alle)ations of the ori)inal petition un(ista0ably
sho-ed a t-in purpose. A&B )uardianship@ and A6B issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration. As
su"h, it -as unne"essary for her to republish the noti"e of hearin) throu)h a ne-spaper of
)eneral "ir"ulation in the provin"e. The a(ended petition -as filed for the only reason
stated in the (otion for leave. so that the D"ase title "an properly and appropriately "apture
or "apsuli5e in "lear ter(s the (aterial aver(ents in the body of the pleadin)s@ thus
avoidin) any "onfusion or (is"on"eption of the nature and real intent and purpose of this
petition,D -hi"h -as for )uardianship over the persons and properties of her (inor "hildren
and for the settle(ent of the intestate estate of the de"edent -ho -as their father. In other
-ords, there bein) no "han)e in the (aterial alle)ations bet-een the ori)inal and a(ended
petitions, the publi"ation of the first in a ne-spaper of )eneral "ir"ulation suffi"ed for
purposes of "o(plian"e -ith the le)al reFuire(ents of noti"e.
7oreover, the appellate "ourt ruled that the petitionerHs re(edy is appeal fro( the orders
"o(plained of under Se"tion &AfB, Rule &'* of the Rules of !ourt, not certiorari and
prohibition.
Not satisfied -ith the de"ision of the !ourt of Appeals, petitioner "o(es to this !ourt
"ontendin) that the appellate "ourt "o((itted the follo-in) errors.
I
TH9 ,:+/I! R9S,OND9NT !O:RT O1 A,,9A/S $RAV9/= AND S9RIO:S/=
9RR9D IN HO/DIN$ THAT TH9 ORI$INA/ ,9TITION AAnneC 1, ,etitionB >AS
1OR A T>IN ,:R,OS9, TO >IT. 1OR $:ARDIANSHI, AND 1OR INT9STAT9
9STAT9 ,RO!99DIN$S@
II
TH9 ,:+/I! R9S,OND9NT !O:RT A,,9A/S S9RIO:S/= 9RR9D IN HO/DIN$
THAT TH9R9 IS NO N99D TO ,:+/ISH TH9 A79ND9D ,9TITION 1OR
AD7INISTRATION O1 TH9 INT9STAT9 9STAT9 TH9R9+= !ONTRAV9NIN$ TH9
R:/9S O1 !O:RT AND TH9 R:/IN$S O1 TH9 S:,R979 !O:RT.
III
TH9 ,:+/I! R9S,OND9NT !O:RT O1 A,,9A/S S9RIO:S/= 9RR9D IN NOT
N://I1=IN$ TH9 ORD9RS AAnneC D,D to DTDB ,R9!I,ITAT9/= ISS:9D EX-
PARTE += TH9 ,:+/I! R9S,OND9NT R9$IONA/ TRIA/ !O:RT IN TH9
INT9STAT9 ,RO!99DIN$S >ITHO:T ,RIOR H9ARIN$ OR NOTI!9 TO
H9R9IN ,9TITION9R TH9R9+= D9,RIVIN$ TH9 /ATT9R AANTONI9TTA
$AR!IA VDA. D9 !H:A B O1 D:9 ,RO!9SS AND O,,ORT:NIT= TO +9
H9ARD.
IV
TH9 ,:+/I! R9S,OND9NT !O:RT O1 A,,9A/S $RAV9/= 9RR9D IN S>99,IN$/=
HO/DIN$ THAT ,9TITION9RHS R979D= IS A,,9A/.
15
In support of her first assi)n(ent of error, petitioner sub(its that the !ourt of AppealsH
"on"lusion that the ori)inal petition -as one for )uardianship and ad(inistration of the
intestate estate is "ontradi"ted by the eviden"e on hand, assertin) that the ori)inal petition
failed to alle)e and state the 2urisdi"tional fa"ts reFuired by the Rules of !ourt in petitions
for ad(inistration of a de"edentHs estate, su"h as. AaB the last a"tual residen"e of the
de"edent at the ti(e of his death@ AbB na(es, a)es and residen"es of the heirs@ and A"B the
na(es and residen"es of the "reditors of the de"edent. ,etitioner also reiterates her
ar)u(ent re)ardin) private respondentHs alle)ed ad(ission that the ori)inal petition -as
one for )uardianship and not for issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration, pointin) to the
Opposition to the 7otion to Dis(iss dated 6' 8uly &**6, -here the private respondent
alle)ed.
&. That this petition is for )uardianship of the (inor "hildren of the petitioner -ho are heirs to the
estate of the late Roberto /. !hua and under Se"tion &, Rule *6 of the Rules of !ourt the venue
shall be at the pla"e -here the (inor resides.
16
as -ell as to the state(ents (ade by "ounsel for the private respondent durin) the 64 8uly
&**6 hearin) on the (otion to dis(iss.
ATT=. R9NDON.
>e filed our opposition to the (otion to dis(iss the petition be"ause this is a petition for
guardianship of minors, not for intestate proceedings. So this is a "ase -here the (other -anted
to be appointed as )uardian be"ause she is also the liti)ant here. +e"ause -henever there is an
intestate pro"eedin)s, she has to represent the (inors, and under the Rules of !ourt in any
)uardianship pro"eedin)s, the venue is at the pla"e -here the (inor is a"tually residin).
18
The petition is devoid of (erit.
The title alone of the ori)inal petition "learly sho-s that the petition is one -hi"h in"ludes
the issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration. The title of said petition reads.
IN R9. ,9TITION 1OR D9!/ARATION O1 H9IRSHI,S, $:ARDIANSHI, OV9R TH9 ,9RSON
AND ,RO,9RTI9S O1 7INORS RO+9RTO A/ON;O AND R:D=ARD A/ON;O, all surna(ed
!H:A and ISS:AN!9 O1 /9TT9RS O1 AD7INISTRATION.
18
/i0e-ise, the prayer of the petition states.
6. That /etters of Ad(inistration be issued to herein petition for the ad(inistration of
the estate of the de"eased RO+9RTO /I7 !H:A.
The ori)inal petition also "ontains the 2urisdi"tional fa"ts reFuired in a petition for the
issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration. Se"tion 6, Rule 3* of the Rules of !ourt reads.
Se". 6. !ontents of petition for letters of ad(inistration I A petition for letters of
ad(inistration (ust be filed by an interested person and (ust sho-, so far as 0no-n
to the petitioner.
AaB urisdictional facts@
AbB The na(es, a)es, and residen"es of the heirs and the na(es and residen"es of
the "reditors, of the de"edentH
A"B The probative value and "hara"ter of the property of the estate@.
AdB The na(e of the person for -ho( letters of ad(inistration are prayed@
!ut no defect in the petition shall render "oid the issuance of letters of
administration. Ae(phasis oursB.
The 2urisdi"tional fa"ts reFuired in a petition for issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration are. A&B
the death of the testator@ A6B residen"e at the ti(e of death in the provin"e -here the
probate "ourt is lo"ated@ and A%B if the de"edent -as a non#resident, the fa"t of bein) a
resident of a forei)n "ountry and that the de"edent has left an estate in the provin"e -here
the "ourt is sittin).
19
>hile para)raph 4 of the ori)inal petition statin).
A4B That Roberto /i( !hua, father of the above (entioned (inors, died intestate on
7ay 64, &**6 in Davao !ity.
failed to indi"ate the residen"e of the de"eased at the ti(e of his death, the o(ission -as
"ured by the a(ended petitions -herein the sa(e para)raph no- reads.
A4B That Roberto /i( !hua, father of the above(entioned (inors is a resident of Cota#ato
Cit$ and died intestate on 7ay 64, &**6 at Davao !ity.
/9
A9(phasis in the ori)inal.B
All told the ori)inal petition alle)ed substantially all the fa"ts reFuired to be stated in the
petition for letters of ad(inistration. !onseFuently, there -as no need to publish the
a(ended petition as petitioner -ould insist in her se"ond assi)n(ent of errors.
+e that as it (ay, petitioner has no le)al standin) to file the (otion to dis(iss as she is not
related to the de"eased, nor does she have any interest in his estate as "reditor or
other-ise. The Rules are eCpli"it on -ho (ay do so.
Se". 4. Opposition to petition for ad(inistration I Any interested person, (ay by
filin) a -ritten opposition, "ontest the petition on the )round of in"o(peten"y of the
person for -ho( letters of ad(inistration are prayed therein, or on the )round of the
"ontestantHs o-n ri)ht to the ad(inistration, and (ay pray that letters issue to
hi(self, or to any "o(petent person or persons na(ed in the opposition..
Only an interested person (ay oppose the petition for issuan"e of letters of ad(inistration.
An interested person is one -ho -ould be benefited by the estate su"h as an heir, or one
-ho has a "lai( a)ainst the estate, su"h as a "reditor@ his interest is (aterial and dire"t,
and not one that is only indire"t or "ontin)ent.
/1
,etitioner -as not able to prove her status as the survivin) -ife of the de"edent. The best
proof of (arria)e bet-een (an and -ife is a (arria)e "ontra"t -hi"h Antonietta !hua failed
to produ"e. The lo-er "ourt "orre"tly disre)arded the photostat "opy of the (arria)e
"ertifi"ate -hi"h she presented, this bein) a violation of the best eviden"e rule, to)ether
-ith other -orthless pie"es of eviden"e. The trial "ourt "orre"tly ruled in its 6& Au)ust &**6
Order that.
. . . Transfer !ertifi"ates of Title, Residen"e !ertifi"ates, passports and other si(ilar do"u(ents
"annot prove (arria)e espe"ially so -hen the petitioner has sub(itted a "ertifi"ation fro( the
/o"al !ivil Re)istrar "on"erned that the alle)ed (arria)e -as not re)istered and a letter fro( the
2ud)e alle)ed to have sole(ni5ed the (arria)e that he has not sole(ni5ed said alle)ed (arria)e.
. . .
//
:nder her third assi)n(ent of error, petitioner "lai(s that the trial "ourt issued its orders,
AnneCes D,D to DTD -ithout prior hearin) or noti"e to her, thus, deprivin) her of due pro"ess.
The orders referred to by petitioner are. Order dated %& Au)ust &**6 appointin) Ro(ulo
/i( :y, first "ousin of the de"eased, as spe"ial ad(inistrator of the estate@ Order dated %&
Au)ust &**6 appointin) private respondent as )uardian over the person and property of the
(inors@ Order dated Au)ust &**%, dire"tin) the transfer of the re(ains of the de"eased
fro( Davao !ity to !otabato !ity@ Order dated G Septe(ber &**% dire"tin) petitioner to turn
over a 7itsubishi $allant "ar o-ned by the estate of the de"eased to the spe"ial
ad(inistrator@ and Order dated 64 Septe(ber &**%, authori5in) the sheriff to brea0 open
the de"easedHs house for the purpose of "ondu"tin) an inventory of the properties found
therein, after the sheriff -as refused entry to the house by the driver and (aid of petitioner.
Apart fro( the fa"t that petitioner -as not entitled to noti"e of the pro"eedin)s of the trial
"ourt, not bein) able to establish proof of her alle)ed (arria)e to the de"eased, or of her
interest in the estate as "reditor or other-ise, petitioner "ate)ori"ally stated in the instant
petition that on 6 O"tober &**% she filed a (otion prayin) for the re"all of the letters of
ad(inistration issued by the trial "ourt and another (otion dated Au)ust &**% prayin) that
the pro"eedin)s "ondu"ted by the trial "ourt be de"lared as a (istrial and the "ourt orders
relative thereto be set aside and nullified. ,etitioner further stated that her (otions -ere
denied by the trial "ourt in its Order dated 66 Nove(ber 6&, &**% and that on %' Nove(ber
&**% she filed a (otion for re"onsideration of the order of denial -hi"h in turn -as denied
by the trial "ourt on &% De"e(ber &**%.
Due pro"ess -as desi)ned to afford opportunity to be heard, not that an a"tual hearin)
should al-ays and indispensably be held.
/3
The essen"e of due pro"ess is si(ply an
opportunity to be heard.
/.
Here, even )rantin) that the petitioner -as not notified of the
orders of the trial "ourt (ar0ed as 9Chibits D,D to DT,D in"lusive, nonetheless, she -as duly
heard in her (otions to re"all letters of ad(inistration and to de"lare the pro"eedin)s of the
"ourt as a D(istrial,D -hi"h (otions -ere denied in the Order dated 66 Nove(ber &**%.
/5
A
(otion for the re"onsideration of this order of denial -as also duly heard by the trial "ourt
but -as denied in its Order of &% De"e(ber &**%.
/6
Denial of due pro"ess "annot be su""essfully invo0ed by a party -ho has had the
opportunity to be heard on his (otion for re"onsideration.
/8
As to the last assi)n(ent of errors, -e a)ree -ith the !ourt of Appeals that the proper
re(edy of the petitioner in said "ourt -as an ordinary appeal and not a spe"ial "ivil a"tion
for certiorari@ -hi"h "an be availed of if a party has no plain, speedy and adeFuate re(edy
in the ordinary "ourse of la-. 9C"ept for her bare alle)ation that an ordinary appeal -ould
be inadeFuate, nothin) on re"ord -ould indi"ate that eCtraordinary re(edy of certiorari or
prohibition is -arranted.
1inally, petitioner further ar)ues as supple(ent to her (e(orandu( that the rulin) of the
!ourt of Appeals treatin) the Spe"ial ,ro"eedin) No. %%& as one for both )uardianship and
settle(ent of estate is in "ontravention of our rulin) in %ome& "s. Imperial,
/8
-hi"h the
petitioner Fuotes.
The distribution of the residue of the estate of the de"eased is a fun"tion pertainin)
property not to the )uardianship pro"eedin)s, but to another pro"eedin) -hi"h the
heirs are at liberty to initiate.
,etitionerHs relian"e on said "ase is (ispla"ed. In the %ome& "ase, the a"tion before the
lo-er "ourt -as (erely one for )uardianship. Therefore said "ourt did not have the
2urisdi"tion to distribute the estate of the de"eased. >hile in the "ase at bar, the petition
filed before the "ourt -as both for )uardianship and settle(ent of estate.
IN VI9> O1 TH9 1OR9$OIN$, the petition of petitioner Antonietta !hua is hereby denied.
SO ORD9R9D.
Nar"asa, C'(', Romero and Purisima, ((', concur'
Foo'*o'#)
& Rollo, p. 4.
6 Id., at &.
% Id., at %.
4 Id., at G'.
Id., at GG#G4.
G Id., at G4#G.
3 Id., at GG#G4.
4 Id., at G*.
* Id., at 3&.
&' Id., at &&'#&&&.
&& Id., at &&%#&&4.
&6 Id., at &66#&6%.
&% Id., at &64.
&4 Id., at %&#%3.
& Id., at &#&G.
&G Id., at &&.
&3 I#id.
&4 Id., at 4.
&* Die5 vs. Serra, & ,hil. 64%@ Santos vs. !astillo, G4 ,hil. 6&&, 7oran,
!o((entaries on the Rules of !ourt, Vol. III &*4' ed.
6' Id., at G'.
6& ,ilipinas Shell ,etroleu( vs. Du(lao, 6'G S!RA 4'.
66 Rollo, p. G3.
6% ,a(antasan n) /un)sod n) 7aynila vs. !ivil Servi"e !o((ission, 64&
S!RA 'G.
64 Ro"es vs. Aportadera, 64% S!RA &'4.
6 Rollo, pp. &66#&6%.
6G Id., at &64.
63 Rubene"ia vs. !ivil Servi"e !o((ission, 644 S!RA G4'@ Rodri)ue5 vs.
,ro2e"t G 7ar0et Servi"e !ooperative, In"., 643 S!RA 64.
64 6 S!RA 44%@ 444.