G.R. No. 59731; January 11, 1990
ALFREDO CHING, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS & PEDRO ASEDILLO, respondents.

FACTS

The case involves a parcel of land originally registered under spouses Maximo Nofuente and Dominga Lumandan. Through a series of conveyances, the property was eventually sold to Ching Leng, who was issued Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 91137 in 1961. Ching Leng died in Boston, USA, in 1965. His son, petitioner Alfredo Ching, was appointed administrator of his estate in a duly published proceeding. Thirteen years after Ching Leng’s death, in 1978, private respondent Pedro Asedillo filed a complaint for reconveyance and cancellation of TCT No. 91137 against “Ching Leng and/or Estate of Ching Leng.” The complaint alleged that the defendant resided abroad and it was unknown if he was alive or dead. Summons was served by publication in a newspaper.
No answer was filed, leading the trial court to declare the defendant in default, receive evidence ex-parte, and render a judgment in 1979 ordering the reconveyance of the property to Asedillo and the cancellation of Ching’s title. This decision was also served by publication. Alfredo Ching learned of the judgment in late 1979 and moved to set it aside as null and void for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant or his estate.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court acquired jurisdiction over the person of the defendant, Ching Leng (a deceased person), or his estate through summons by publication, thereby rendering its judgment valid.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction, making its judgment null and void. Jurisdiction over a deceased person is impossible to acquire. The proper defendant was the estate of Ching Leng, which was already under judicial administration in a separate special proceeding. Jurisdiction over an estate is acquired by filing the action in the court where the estate is being administered or by serving summons on the duly appointed administrator. The estate here had a known administrator, Alfredo Ching, whose appointment and address were matters of public record. Service of summons by publication upon a deceased person and an unrepresented “estate” was fatally defective and violated due process. The Court emphasized that a Torrens title, like TCT No. 91137, is conclusive evidence of ownership, and Asedillo’s action for reconveyance based on possession, filed nearly two decades after the title was issued, was also barred by laches. The failure to assert a right for an unreasonable time presumes abandonment. Consequently, the Court granted the petition, reversed the Court of Appeals, and dismissed the complaint in Civil Case No. 6888-P.