LAW ON SUCCESSION | BUAN VS. ALCANTARA, G.R. NO. L-59592, FEBRUARY 29, 1984
BUAN VS. ALCANTARA,
G.R.
NO. L-59592, FEBRUARY 29, 1984
TOPIC/DOCTRINE
Pendency
of damage suits filed against administrators in connection with decedents’
transportation business, not a valid reason to defer settlement of estate
FACTS
The glaring
problem in this case is that the intestate case below, which was instituted in
1953, is still pending despite the lapse of 30 years, mainly on the proposition
that damage suits filed against the administrators in connection with the land
transportation business of the decedents have prevented the settlement of the
estate.
ISSUE
The Probate Court erred in denying closure of administration already twenty eight years long just for a few remaining pending separate damage suits against the estate arising from vehicular accidents.
RULING
Yes.
The court ruled that the case of Dinglasan v. Ang Chia, 88
Phil, 476 (1951), upon which respondent Court relied in denying closure, will
not apply, first, because the litigation involved therein was for the recovery
of real property and, second, it was the only property of the estate left
subject of administration such that whatever was determined in the civil case
would have had far-reaching effects in the determination and distribution of
the estate. In this case, however, the damage suits bear no intimate connection
or close interrelation with the estate per se, specially after incorporation.
It should also be borne in mind that vehicular accidents are a risk inherent in
transportation business, and as long as this business continues in operation,
accidents are bound to occur from time to time with the consequent filing of
suits by persons who may be injured. To await the termination or settlement of
all these suits before closing the intestate proceedings will virtually place
the estate under perpetual administration contrary to the intendment of the law.