G.R. No. 84250 July 20, 1992
Daya Maria Tol-Noquera, petitioner, vs. Hon. Adriano R. Villamor, Presiding Judge, Branch XVI, Regional Trial Court, 8th Judicial Region, Naval, Leyte, and Diosdado Tol, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Daya Maria Tol-Noquera filed a petition in December 1986 for her appointment as administratrix of the property of Remigio Tol, who had been missing since 1984. She alleged she was the acknowledged natural child of Remigio Tol and claimed that respondent Diosdado Tol had fraudulently secured a free patent and obtained title over Remigio’s property. She sought administration to recover said property. Diosdado Tol opposed, arguing Daya Maria was not an acknowledged natural child and that the property was covered by an original certificate of title in his name. The trial court dismissed the petition on March 31, 1987, on the ground it was a collateral attack on a Torrens title and that appointing an administrator was useless given a third person’s claim of ownership. After denial of her motion for reconsideration, the petitioner filed a notice of appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly dismissed the petition for appointment as administratrix on the grounds that it constituted a collateral attack on a Torrens title and was rendered unnecessary by a third party’s claim of ownership.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court granted the petition and remanded the case. The Court held that the petition for appointment as administratrix was not a collateral attack on the Torrens title. The mention of alleged fraudulent issuance of title was merely a justification for the appointment, with no indication that the title would be attacked in the same proceeding. The private respondent’s argument regarding the petitioner’s disqualification from inheriting from the absentee’s relatives under Article 992 of the Civil Code was immaterial to her right to petition for a declaration of absence or to be appointed administratrix. The laws on absence (Articles 381-386 of the Civil Code) aim to protect the interests and property of the absentee, and the question of whether the administrator may inherit is not controlling. The issue of ownership of the property titled to Diosdado Tol should be resolved in a separate proceeding and does not outright deny the right to be appointed administratrix. Even if the title is indefeasible, other remedies like reconveyance or damages are available to the administratrix. The appeal was perfected seasonably. The case was remanded to determine the petitioner’s legal personality to petition for declaration of absence and her competence to be appointed administratrix.