GR L 13938; (July, 1968) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-13938 July 31, 1968
IN THE MATTER OF THE PROBATE OF THE WILL OF CHRISTIAN HARRIS, Deceased. PEDRO BUTIONG, petitioner-appellee, vs. THE SURIGAO CONSOLIDATED MINING CO., INC., oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Pedro Butiong commenced Special Proceedings No. 737 in the Court of First Instance of Surigao for the probate of a document, Exhibit G, purporting to be the last will and testament of Christian Harris. The will named Butiong, described as Harris’s adopted son, as the sole and universal heir of Harris’s properties, including shares and interests in the Mindanao Mother Lode Mining Co., Inc. and the Surigao Consolidated Mining Co., Inc. The Surigao Consolidated Mining Co., Inc. opposed the probate on the ground of forgery. After proceedings, the lower court issued an order admitting the document to probate. The Company appealed, assigning several errors. Butiong, in turn, maintained that the lower court erred in entertaining the Company’s opposition and in not dismissing its appeal.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the Surigao Consolidated Mining Co., Inc., as an oppositor-appellant, has the legal standing or interest to oppose the probate of the will of Christian Harris.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the lower court allowing the will to probate. The Court held that Butiong’s contention was well-taken, as it is well-settled that one who has or can have no interest in succeeding a decedent cannot oppose the probate of his alleged will. The appellant Company did not claim to have such interest in the succession to Christian Harris. Therefore, the lower court should not have considered its opposition nor given due course to the appeal. Independently of this, the Court found the appellant’s assignments of error devoid of merit. The notice of hearing was properly published in the “Semana,” a newspaper of general circulation in Surigao. The relationship of Butiong and Sykimte to the deceased and the ownership of the properties were immaterial to the probate. The testimony of attesting witnesses and a handwriting expert for Butiong satisfactorily established the genuineness of Harris’s signature and the due execution of the will, outweighing the negative evidence presented by the appellant. The explanation for the delay in presenting the will for probate was deemed credible and of minimal importance given the established authenticity of the will. Costs were imposed against the appellant.