De Arranz vs. Galing, G.R. No. 77047, 28 May 1988

De Arranz vs. Galing, 

G.R. No. 77047, 28 May 1988


FACTS The case involves a petition for review on certiorari regarding the probate proceedings of the last will and testament of Montserrat R-Infante. The petitioners, who were named legatees and devisees, claimed they were not given the required personal notice of the probate proceedings, which they argued constituted a reversible error. Whether the failure to provide personal notice to known heirs, legatees, and devisees was a jurisdictional requirement in the probate of a will.


RULING Yes, the requirement for personal notice is indeed mandatory under the rules.


Here, the Court emphasized that the probate court had knowledge of the petitioners' residences, as their names and addresses were included in the petition for probate. Hence absence of personal notice, despite the known addresses, was deemed a grave abuse of discretion. The Court annulled the decision of the Court of Appeals and remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court for further proceedings.








Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BALA V. MARTINEZ, 181 SCRA 459