G.R. No. L-1358; August 31, 1949
MARIETA J. ROTEA and SANTIAGO ROTEA, petitioners-appellants, vs. LEVY HERMANOS, INC., ET AL., claimants-appellees.

FACTS

Petitioners Marieta J. Rotea and Santiago Rotea applied for voluntary insolvency in 1943. The court declared them insolvent and took steps to administer their estate, but no assignee was ever appointed. By late 1944, the Roteas claimed to have acquired sufficient funds to pay all their debts in full. They tendered payment to their creditors. Three creditors accepted, but two (Levy Hermanos, Inc. and Levy & Blum, Inc.) refused. The Roteas then deposited the amounts for the refusing creditors with the court clerk and later with the sheriff. In 1946, the Roteas petitioned the court for the final dismissal of the insolvency proceedings under Section 81 of the Insolvency Law, arguing that all credits had been fully paid. The two refusing creditors opposed the petition. The court denied the petition for dismissal, and the Roteas appealed.

ISSUE

Whether the order of the lower court denying the petition for dismissal of the insolvency proceedings is appealable.

RULING

No, the order is not appealable. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. First, the petition for dismissal was filed under Section 81 of the Insolvency Law, which allows dismissal only if no creditor files written objections. Here, creditors filed objections. Second, Section 82 of the Insolvency Law enumerates the specific orders from which an appeal may be taken in insolvency proceedings. The order denying dismissal under Section 81 does not fall within any of the appealable orders listed in Section 82. It is distinct from an order refusing a discharge of the debtor under Sections 64-69. Consequently, the appeal was not entertainable, and the insolvency proceedings were ordered to continue in accordance with law.

AI Generated by Armztrong.