Facts:

The case involves petitioners Benito Bolisay and Generosa Buted Bolisay against respondents Hon. Leonardo S. Alcid, acting as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte, and Angela Buted Pascual, the administratrix of the intestate estate of Luciana Abadilla. The events leading to the case began with the death of Luciana Abadilla, whose estate was being settled in Special Proceedings No. 4560-II. The subject property in question is a 538-square meter lot located in Barrio San Jacinto, Laoag City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-12782, issued to the petitioners on August 20, 1976. The petitioners had held title to the property since June 5, 1961, under TCT No. (T-7271)-3377. The property was originally owned by Luciana Abadilla, who sold a portion of it to Filemon Pascua in 1952. The petitioners used the property as collateral for a loan from the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) in 1962, which they repaid in 1974 after constructing a 7-door a...

Facts:

The petitioner spouses, Benito Bolisay and Generosa Buted Bolisay, hold a Torrens title covering Parcel 31—a lot in Laoag City acquired in 1961 and later reissued in 1976 with a slightly reduced area due to a prior sale and mortgage transaction. The property, upon which they constructed a 7-door apartment financed partly by a GSIS loan, became the subject of dispute when Angela Buted Pascual, the administratrix of the intestate estate of their late mother Luciana Abadilla, included it in the estate’s inventory filed on May 19, 1973. Concurrently, two separate ordinary actions were pending: one for the annulment of the deed of sale executed by Luciana against the petitioners (Civil Case No. 6135-II) and another for partition (Civil Case No. 2452-I). Meanwhile, without notifying the petitioners or other interested parties, the respondent judge in Special Proceedings No. 4560-II, on July 27, 1976, allowed the administratrix to collect rental income from the apartment based solely on its inclusion in the inventory. Subsequent motions by the petitioners for reconsideration of the rental collection order and for excluding Parcel 31 from the inventory were denied by the court.

Issue:

1. Whether the probate court, acting in its capacity as supervisory over the estate's inventory, has the authority to determine, even provisionally, the propriety of including a property covered by a Torrens title when there is an ongoing dispute over its ownership.
2. Whether the inclusion of Parcel 31 in the estate’s inventory as filed by the administratrix, and the subsequent order allowing her to collect the rentals, can be sustained given the contested nature of the title in separate civil actions.
3. How the presumptive conclusiveness of a Torrens title should be balanced against an administratrix’s claim over a property merely because it was listed in an inventory.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)