GR 34760; (September, 1973) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-34760 September 28, 1973
SERAFIN MEDINA and ROSALIA M. DEL CARMEN, assisted by DOMINADOR DEL CARMEN, petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, THE HONORABLE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ZAMBALES and BEDA GONZALES, respondents.
FACTS
The case involves the intestate estate of Agustin Medina, pending for over thirteen years. The then-special administrator, with court approval, sold the estate property “Bitukang Manok” to petitioner Rosalia M. del Carmen, an heir, for P24,000. Private respondent Beda Gonzales, an assignee of some heirs’ interests, opposed the sale and appealed its approval. While his appeal was pending in the Court of Appeals, the lower court, acting on Gonzales’ motion, appointed him as the new special administrator of the estate. Petitioners challenged this appointment, arguing Gonzales held an adverse interest because, as an appellant, he was personally opposing the very sale he was now tasked to uphold as administrator.
ISSUE
Whether the lower court gravely abused its discretion in appointing Beda Gonzales as special administrator despite his adverse and conflicting interest in the estate property.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court modified the appellate court’s dismissal and restricted Gonzales’s authority. The Court held that a person with an adverse interest is unsuitable for the trust of an administrator. Gonzales occupied fundamentally inconsistent positions: in his personal capacity as an assignee, he was appealing to nullify the sale of “Bitukang Manok,” while as a court-appointed special administrator, he would be duty-bound to represent and defend the estate’s interest in upholding the same court-approved sale. This conflict of interest disqualifies him from administering that specific property. Consequently, the Court excluded Gonzales from interfering with petitioner Rosalia del Carmen’s possession and enjoyment of the harvests from “Bitukang Manok,” to which she was entitled as the approved vendee. The Court made permanent the injunction against Gonzales disturbing her possession. Furthermore, noting the inordinate delay of over thirteen years without a regular administrator, the Supreme Court directed the lower court to appoint a suitable, disinterested person as regular administrator to expedite the estate’s settlement and final distribution. The appointment of Gonzales as special administrator was allowed to stand only for the temporary care of the estate’s other properties.