Title
Salvador vs. Sta. Maria
Case
G.R. No. L-25952
Decision Date
Jun 30, 1967
Celestino Salvador's heirs contested ownership of reconveyed lands, claiming they belonged to them, not the estate. The Supreme Court ruled the properties remain part of the estate, subject to debt settlement, affirming the probate court's authority over them.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 156167)

Background of Property Dispute

Celestino Salvador owned seven parcels of titled land and two parcels of untitled land in Bigaa, Bulacan. In 1941, he executed a deed of sale to spouses Alfonso Salvador and Anatolia Halili, claiming it was void for lack of consideration. On May 12, 1955, he filed a suit for reconveyance. After his death in 1956, twenty-one individuals were substituted as plaintiffs in the reconveyance action, while a separate probate action was initiated for his will.

Administration and Probate Proceedings

Dominador Cardenas was appointed as special administrator of Celestino Salvador's estate, later becoming the executor following the admission of his will to probate. An inventory in the probate proceedings included the same parcels subject to the reconveyance action. The subsequent judgments involved orders for reconveyance and the actual transfer of titles to new certificates in favor of the twenty-one heirs.

Legal Proceedings and Issues Raised

The Court of First Instance (CFI) ruled in 1956, ordering reconveyance of the properties to the estate, which was later affirmed by the Court of Appeals. However, matters escalated further when portions of the estate were sold to pay debts. On March 30, 1966, the probate court ordered the release of funds from the sale to cover debts, prompting the heirs to file a special civil action for certiorari, questioning the probate court's authority to manage the reconveyed properties.

Claims of the Petitioners

The petitioners assert that since the parcels were reconveyed to them, these lands should not be considered part of the estate that needs to service its debts. They argue that as heirs, their claim to the properties, recognized through the reconveyance judgment, negates the estate's claim over these assets.

Ruling on Heirs' Rights and Estate Debts

The court clarified that while heirs have rights to their shares, such rights are contingent upon the settlement of estate debts. The reconveyance to the heirs was, in essence, a transfer on behalf of the estate, obligating the heirs to pay any outstanding debts prior to separating their distributive shares. The properties, even

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.