LAW ON SUCCESSION | KALAW VS. IAC, G.R. NO. 74618, SEPTEMBER 2, 1992
KALAW
VS. IAC,
G.R.
NO. 74618, SEPTEMBER 2, 1992
TOPIC/DOCTRINE
The
settled rule is that the removal of an administrator under Section 2 of Rule 82
lies within the discretion of the Court appointing him.
FACTS
The
removal of petitioner as administratrix was on the ground of her failure for 6
years and 3 months from the time she was appointed as administratrix to render
an accounting of her administration as required by Section 8 of Rule 85 of the
Rules of Court."
ISSUE
Whether the removal of the
administrator is correct despite subsequent compliance.
RULING
Yes.
RULING
The
court ruled that subsequent compliance in rendering an accounting report did
not purge her of her negligence in not rendering an accounting for more than
six years, which justifies petitioner’s removal as administratrix and the
appointment of private respondent in her place as mandated by Section 2 of Rule
82 of the Rules of Court. As correctly stated by the appellate court: "The
settled rule is that the removal of an administrator under Section 2 of Rule 82
lies within the discretion of the Court appointing him. As aptly expressed by
the Supreme Court in the case of Degala v. Ceniza and Umipig, 78 Phil. 791,
‘the sufficiency of any ground for removal should thus be determined by said
court, whose sensibilities are, in the first place, affected by any act or
omission on the part of the administrator not comfortable to or in disregard of
the rules or the orders of the court.’ Consequently, appellate tribunals are
disinclined to interfere with the action taken by a probate court in the matter
of the removal of an executor or administrator unless positive error or gross
abuse of discretion is shown. (Borromeo v. Borromeo, 97 Phil. 549; Matute v.
Court of Appeals, 26 SCRA 768.)
Here,
the court ruled that the removal of petitioner as administratrix was on the
ground of her failure for 6 years and 3 months from the time she was appointed
as administratrix to render an accounting of her administration as required by
Section 8 of Rule 85 of the Rules of Court."