Tuesday, March 1, 2016

ECHAUS vs. BLANCO 179 SCRA 704



FACTS: 

Angelina Echaus instituted a civil case against C.N. Hodges praying for the recovery of her share in the profits covering the Ba-Ta subdivision plus damages. During its pendency and before a decision could be rendered by the RTC, Hodges died. Upon his death, he was substituted by PCIB as administrator of his estate. A petition for the settlement of the estate of C. N. Hodges was instituted in 1962. On March 1963, a notice to creditors was published in "Yuhum". A judgment was rendered by the trial court in favor of Echaus and a writ of execution was subsequently issued against PCIB. On February 20, 1967, Echaus filed her motion for direct payment. Magno averred that the claim of Echaus was already barred for she filed it more than 4 years from the publication of notice.

ISSUE: WON the claim presented in the estate proceedings is already barred by the statute of non-claims. 

RULING: 

NO. The Rules of Court allows a creditor to file his claim after the period set by the court in the notice to creditors, provided the conditions stated in the rules are present. The period prescribed in the notice to creditors is not exclusive; that money claims against the estate may be allowed any time before an order of distribution is entered, at the discretion of the court for cause and upon such terms as are equitable. At the time of Echaus’ motion to direct payment of the judgment credit was filed, no order of distribution was issued yet. In this case, the claim was filed in the probate court on February 1969, while the defendants in the civil case were still perfecting their appeal therein. The record does not show that the administrator objected thereto upon the ground that it was filed out of time. The pendency of that case is a good excuse for tardiness in the filing of the claim.

No comments:

Post a Comment