Case Digest (G.R. No. 11179)
Facts:
The case titled "The Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Agustin Belzunce, Administrator of the Estate of Ruperto Bulzunce" was decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on March 14, 1917. The appeal arose from a judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance of the Tenth Judicial District, which ruled in favor of the plaintiff, the Bank of the Philippine Islands, awarding them the sum of P50,000. The court also mandated that this amount would accrue interest at a rate of 9 percent per annum, compounded quarterly from January 22, 1913, until the final payment was made. The primary contention in this appeal was centered on the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance. The appellant, Agustin Belzunce, argued that since the claim was against a deceased individual, the plaintiff was required to demonstrate that the claim had been duly presented to the estate's commissioners, that it had been rejected, and that an appeal had been ...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 11179)
Facts:
Parties Involved:
- Plaintiff and Appellee: The Bank of the Philippine Islands.
- Defendant and Appellant: Agustin Belzunce, Administrator of the Estate of Ruperto Bulzunce.
Nature of the Case:
- The Bank of the Philippine Islands filed a claim against the estate of Ruperto Bulzunce for the sum of P50,000, with interest at 9% per annum compounded quarterly from January 22, 1913, until full payment.
Judgment of the Lower Court:
- The Court of First Instance of the Tenth Judicial District ruled in favor of the plaintiff, awarding the claimed amount with the stipulated interest.
Appeal Grounds:
- The appellant contested the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance, arguing that the plaintiff failed to show that the claim had been duly presented to the commissioners appointed to hear claims against the estate, rejected by them, and appealed to the Court of First Instance as required by law.
Issue:
- Whether the Court of First Instance had jurisdiction to render the judgment, given the appellant's contention that the plaintiff failed to prove the necessary preliminary steps (presentation of the claim to the commissioners, rejection, and appeal) to confer jurisdiction.
Ruling:
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, holding that the appellant's contention was not well-founded. The Court ruled that the jurisdiction of Courts of First Instance is presumed in the absence of clear evidence to the contrary.
Ratio:
- (Unlock)