Manalo vs Court of Appeals Case Digest GR 129242 January 16, 2001

Manalo vs Court of Appeals Case Digest

G.R. No. 129242 ; January 16, 2001

PRINCIPLES:
Special Proceedings

1. Averments and the character of the relief sought in the complaint or petition = controlling in the determination of the nature of an action or proceeding

2. Article 151 of the Family Code is applicable only to ordinary civil action (NOT applicable to special proceeding).

Article 151 of the Family Code

– requires that earnest efforts toward a compromise involving members of the same family should have been made prior to the filling of the petition.

Reasons:

a.) Term “suit” = refers to an action by one person or persons against another or other in a court of justice in which the plaintiff pursues the remedy which the law affords him for the redress of an injury or enforcement of a right. 

b.) Intention of the Code Commission as revealed in the Report of the Code Commission is to make the provision be applicable only to civil actions. 

3. Special Proceeding = A remedy which seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact

4. Petition for issuance of letters of administration, settlement, and distribution of estate = special proceeding (not an ordinary civil action)

Reasons:

a.  Seeks to establish the right of the heirs to the estate of the deceased

- petition contains sufficient jurisdictional facts required in a petition for the settlement of estate of a deceased person such as the fact of death of the late Troadio Manalo on February 14, 1992, as well as his residence in the City of Manila at the time of his said death.

- The fact of death of the decedent and of his residence within he country are foundation facts upon which all the subsequent proceedings in the administration of the estate rest. 

- The petition is SP.PROC No. 92-63626 also contains an enumeration of the names of his legal heirs including a tentative list of the properties left by the deceased which are sought to be settled in the probate proceedings.

- Relief's prayed for in the said petition leave no room for doubt as regard the intention of the petitioners therein (private respondents herein) to seek judicial settlement of the estate of their deceased father, Troadio Manalo.

b. Non- adversarial.

- Oppositors (herein petitioners) are not being sued in SP. PROC. No. 92-63626 for any cause of action as in fact no defendant was imploded therein.

FACTS: Troadic Manalo died intestate and was survived by his wife, Pilar, and his 11 children.  The deceased left several real properties in Manila and a business in Tarlac.  Herein respondents (originally petitioners), 8 of the surviving children, filed a petition with RTC Manila for the judicial settlement of the estate of their late father and for appointment of their brother Romeo Manalo as administrator thereof. 

On the date set for hearing of the petition, the trial court issued an order 'declaring the whole world in default, except the government”. However, the trial court set aside the order of general default of herein petitioners (originally respondents - the other children of Troadic who did not join the original petitioners) and they were granted 10 days within which to file their opposition to the petition. 

Herein petitioners then filed an Omnibus Motion^. The trial court denied this motion. Petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court with the Court of Appeals averring among others that here was absence of earnest efforts toward compromise among members of the same family. CA dismissed the petition for certiorari. The motion for reconsideration filed by herein petitioners was likewise denied.

ISSUE: WON the case at bar is covered under Article 151 where earnest efforts toward compromise should first be made prior the filing of the petition.

HELD: NO. Article 151 of the Family Code applicable only to ordinary civil actions and not to special proceedings.

It is a fundamental rule that in the determination of the nature of an action or proceeding, the averments and the character of the relief were sought in the complaint or petition, shall be controlling. 

Why the case is a special proceeding:

In relation to the instant case, the careful scrutiny of the petition for the issuance of letters of administration, settlement and distribution of the estate reveals that herein petitioners’ claim is not in the nature of an ordinary civil action. 

The said petition contains sufficient jurisdictional facts required in a petition for the settlement of estate of a deceased person such as the fat of death of the late Troadio Manalo on February 14, 1992, as well as his residence in the City of Manila at the time of his said death. The fact of death of the decedent and of his residence within he country are foundation facts upon which all the subsequent proceedings in the administration of the estate rest. The petition is SP.PROC No. 92-63626 also contains an enumeration of the names of his legal heirs including a tentative list of the properties left by the deceased which are sought to be settled in the probate proceedings. In addition, the relief's prayed for in the said petition leave no room for doubt as regard the intention of the petitioners therein (private respondents herein) to seek judicial settlement of the estate of their deceased father, Troadio Manalo. The petition for issuance of letters of administration, settlement, and distribution of estate is a special proceeding and as such a remedy whereby the petitioners therein seek to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.  Hence, it must be emphasized that herein petitioners are not being sued in such case for any cause of action as in fact no defendant was pronounced therein.  

The oppositors (herein petitioners) are not being sued in SP. PROC. No. 92-63626 for any cause of action as in fact no defendant was imploded therein. The petitioners therein (private respondents herein) merely seek to establish the fact of death of their father and subsequently to be duly recognized as among the heirs of the said deceased so that they can validly exercise their right to participate in the settlement and liquidation of the estate of the decedent consistent with the limited and special jurisdiction of the probate court.

Why Article 151 of the Family Code is only applicable to ordinary civil actions:

The provision of Article 151 is applicable only to ordinary civil actions.  It is clear from the term “suit” that it refers to an action by one person or persons against another or other in a court of justice in which the plaintiff pursues the remedy which the law affords him for the redress of an injury or enforcement of a right.  It is also the intention of the Code Commission as revealed in the Report of the Code Commission to make the provision be applicable only to civil actions.