FACTS:
On August 29, 1952, the trial court ordered that Iluminada De Gala-Sison,
administratix of the estate of Generoso, to include in her inventory of
properties certain pieces of jewelry and to deposit P40,000 cash in her
possession with a reputable bank. Iluminada filed an amended inventory,
however, she did not comply with the order. She instead filed a manifestation
that there was no necessity for any deposit of the amount of P40,000 for it was
already used for expenses, advances and allowances, litigation expenses and
attorney’s fees, and compensation for the asministratix.
The court thereafter
ordered Iluminada to deposit P39,240 in her possession in a reputable bank.
Iluminada filed a motion for new trial and/or reconsideration claiming that the disbursements itemized in her
verified accounting are unsupported by receipts and that she may be granted a
day in court for the presentation of her evidence or receipts supporting her
verified accounting and disbursements itemized therein. Before action could be
taken by the lower court on her motion she filed a petition for certiorari.
ISSUE: WON the petition will prosper.
RULING:
NO. The instant petition must be dismissed. In the
case at bar, there is pending before the trial court a motion for new trial
and/or reconsideration filed by Iluminada. In said motion, she prays for a
chance to submit "receipts proving the disbursements itemized in her
verified accounting, and therefore begs leave for a new trial to offer such
evidence". She also alleges therein that she will submit evidence which
will show that her disbursements "are properly and legally chargeable to
the estate". It is very obvious that the court a quo should be given an opportunity to act on these matters
because the correctness of the order requiring Iluminada to deposit the amount
of P39,240.15 with a banking institution is dependent upon the ascertainment by
the court of the correctness of the account of the administratrix. the matters
relating to the advances to her as heir, her compensation as administratrix and
her other disbursements cannot be considered separately from the order to
deposit the amount of P39,240.15, for as the respondent court observed:
"It is ... very obvious that should said petitions be granted, she shall
be relieved thereby of her obligation to deposit the amount of P39,314.15 as
ordered by this Court."
No comments:
Post a Comment