G.R. No. 47404 - Herdez vs. Imperial

Aurora Hernandez, acting as the petitioner and appellant, asserted that she was the widow of the deceased Maximo N. Imperial and the mother of his children, all of whom were minors: Edmundo, Eva, Lourdes, Maximo, and Thelma.
She initiated a tutela de los menores (guardianship proceeding) on behalf of her children and simultaneously sought the partition of the deceased’s estate.

On January 7, 1939, an order was issued wherein Attorney Ubaldo Arcangel was appointed as curador ad litem (legal guardian) of the minor children. This appointment was made at Aurora Hernandez’s request to safeguard the rights of the minors in connection with the partition of the estate of Maximo N. Imperial, who died intestate.
On January 23, 1939, the same court approved the partition agreement between the widow and the minors’ representative, as set forth in the said order.
Several months later, the minors Jose Augusto Imperial and Ana Imperial, having learned of the partition and its approval, petitioned via their lawyer for a reconsideration of the order approving the partition.

The petitioning minors argued that they were unjustly disregarded in the partition process, contending that, as natural children of the deceased, their interests had been sidelined.
It was alleged that although Aurora Hernandez had initiated the tutela on January 30, 1930, she failed to present a complete and accurate inventory of the deceased’s properties at that time; instead, an incomplete inventory dated January 6, 1939, was submitted.
The minors further asserted that the inventory deliberately excluded additional properties of their father to defraud their rightful claims.
They contended that the court lacked the jurisdiction to approve an estate partition within the framework of a tutela proceeding, emphasizing that distinct legal processes must be employed for matters of child guardianship and estate partition.

The Juzgado de Primera Instancia (Court of First Instance) of Albay, upon finding the minors’ petition well founded, annulled both the January 7 and January 23, 1939, orders on the ground that they were not aligned with the legal provisions governing tutela proceedings.
Aurora Hernandez, dissenting from the annulment, filed an appeal challenging the court’s decision, arguing that the court did not possess the authority to nullify the prior orders.

Whether the Juzgado de Primera Instancia erred in annulment by invalidating the orders dated January 7 and 23, 1939, within the confines of a tutela proceeding.
Whether the guardian-appointment and subsequent partition of the deceased’s estate could legally be approved in a tutela proceeding, given that partition actions require a separate judicial process.
Whether the exclusion of the petitioning minors, Jose Augusto Imperial and Ana Imperial, from the partition proceedings was lawful considering their status as natural and recognized children of the deceased.