Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 388 views

    Magallanes Vs Kayanan and Heirs of Eligio Magallanes

    Uploaded by

    genel marquez
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court acting as a probate court did not have jurisdiction to determine ownership of two parcels of land claimed by both the heirs of Filomena Magallanes and heirs of Eligio Magallanes. While a probate court can determine if a property should be included in an estate's inventory or resolve title issues if all parties consent, this case was a petition for partition that involved a dispute over adverse title, which must be decided by the regular trial court using its general jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Magallanes Vs Kayanan and Heirs of Eligio Magallanes

    Uploaded by

    genel marquez
    388 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court acting as a probate court did not have jurisdiction to determine ownership of two parcels of land claimed by both the heirs of Filomena Magallanes and heirs of Eligio Magallanes. While a probate court can determine if a property should be included in an estate's inventory or resolve title issues if all parties consent, this case was a petition for partition that involved a dispute over adverse title, which must be decided by the regular trial court using its general jurisdiction.

    Original Title

    Magallanes vs Kayanan and Heirs of Eligio Magallanes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court acting as a probate court did not have jurisdiction to determine ownership of two parcels of land claimed by both the heirs of Filomena Magallanes and heirs of Eligio Magallanes. While a probate court can determine if a property should be included in an estate's inventory or resolve title issues if all parties consent, this case was a petition for partition that involved a dispute over adverse title, which must be decided by the regular trial court using its general jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    388 views1 page

    Magallanes Vs Kayanan and Heirs of Eligio Magallanes

    Uploaded by

    genel marquez
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court acting as a probate court did not have jurisdiction to determine ownership of two parcels of land claimed by both the heirs of Filomena Magallanes and heirs of Eligio Magallanes. While a probate court can determine if a property should be included in an estate's inventory or resolve title issues if all parties consent, this case was a petition for partition that involved a dispute over adverse title, which must be decided by the regular trial court using its general jurisdiction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Magallanes vs Kayanan and Heirs of Eligio Magallanes

    Facts:

    - Petitioner Lucena Magallanes filed a solicitud praying that two parcel of lands be partitioned and
    distributed among the heirs of the deceased Filomena Magallanes
    - The heirs of eligio Magallanes, private respondents in this case, filed their opposition and
    motion to dismiss the Solicitud claiming title and ownership over the parcel of lands in question
    and raising the issue that the trial court is devoid of jurisdiction to resolve the issues in the
    pleadings.
    - The lower court rendered a summary judgment confirming the private respondents as the
    absolute and exclusive owners of the subject properties.
    - Motion for reconsideration was denied hence the petition in the Supreme Court

    Issue:

    Whether or not the trial court acting as probate court has jurisdiction to pass finally and definitely
    upon the title or ownership of the properties involved in the summary settlement of the estate of
    the deceased.

    Ruling:

    No.

    - Well established is the doctrine that the property, whether real or personal, which are alleged
    to form part of the estate of a deceased person but claimed by another to be his property by
    adverse title to that of the deceased and his estate and not by virtue of any right of inheritance
    from the deceased, cannot be determined by the probate court.
    - Such questions must be submitted to the Court of First Instance in the exercise of its general
    jurisdiction to try and determine ordinary actions. 1 The probate court may do so only for the
    purpose of determining 1.whether or not a given property should be included in the inventory
    of the estate of the deceased, but such determination is not conclusive and is still subject to a
    final decision in a separate action to be instituted between the parties. 2. Likewise, the probate
    court may also determine questions of title to property if the parties voluntarily submitted to its
    jurisdiction and introduced evidence to prove ownership.
    - this case was not for the purpose of determining whether or not the given property should be
    included in the inventory of the estate of the deceased. Neither have all of the parties
    voluntarily submitted the issue of ownership for resolution by the court.
    - The action was partition and distribution if the properties left by the deceased.

    You might also like