032. HEIRS OF SY BANG v.

SY

Case 1. Heirs of Jose Sy Bang, Heirs of Julian Sy and Oscar Sy vs. Rolando Sy, Rosalino Sy, Lucio Sy, Enrique Sy, Rosauro Sy, Bartolome Sy, Florecita Sy, Lourdes Sy, Julieta Sy, and Rosita Ferrera-Sy Case 2. luminada !an, S"ouses Julian Sy and Rosa !an, #enaida !an and $a. Emma Sy vs. Bartolome Sy, Rosalino Sy, Florecita Sy, Rolando Sy, Lourdes Sy, Rosauro Sy, Julieta Sy and Rosita Ferrera-Sy Oct. 13, 2009 Petitions for review on certiorari under Rule 45 Nachura, J. !er" lon#, ver" $rocedural case. % a$olo#i&e for the di#est len#th.' Fun size version (acts) *" +an# died and left a lot of $ro$erties and heirs. ,urin# the course of the $roceedin#s re#ardin# his estate, the -ud#e deferred rulin# u$on the .uestion of includin# $ro$erties in the na/es of Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 0nri.ue, assi#ned a receiver, and ordered the cancellation of notices of lis $endens. 1eanwhile, Rosita, *" +an#2s widow, wanted her widow2s allowance 3ut $etitioners said she su$$osedl" e4ecuted a waiver of clai/s for a 3it of /one" and a $iece of land. Res$ondents said no, she2s too old and ill to 3e in full $ossession of her facilities at the ti/e she affi4ed her thu/3/ar5 on the waiver and that she2d thu/3/ar5 an"thin# the" as5ed her to. *he #ot her widow2s allowance, which would 3e drawn fro/ old *" +an#2s estate. 6hile $etitioners .uestioned this, res$ondents filed a $etition for #uardianshi$ over Rosita. Rosauro wanted to 3e the s$ecial #uardian so he filed 3efore the #uardianshi$ court a 1otion to Order 7ourt ,e$osit of 6idow2s 8llowance Ordered 3" the *u$re/e 7ourt. 9e also wanted an order fro/ the *7 to order the $etitioners to $a" u$ or the" #o to -ail. Petitioners $ulled out all the sto$s to evade their o3li#ation to $a" even under the threat of conte/$t and i/$rison/ent. 9eld) relevant to to$ic' 8 #uardianshi$ court does not have -urisdiction to enforce $a"/ent of widow2s allowance. Rather, that is with the court with -urisdiction over the settle/ent of the estate. :enerall", the #uardianshi$ court e4ercisin# s$ecial and li/ited -urisdiction cannot actuall" order the deliver" of the $ro$ert" of the ward found to 3e e/3e&&led, concealed or conve"ed. Onl" in e4tre/e cases, where $ro$ert" clearl" 3elon#s to the ward or where his title has 3een -udiciall" decided, /a" the court direct its deliver" to the #uardian. Facts Case Rolando *" filed a co/$laint for $artition a#ainst s$ouses Jose *" +an# and %lu/inada ;an, s$ouses Julian *" and Rosa ;an, <enaida *", 1a. 0//a *", Oscar *", Rosalino *", =ucio *", 0nri.ue *", Rosauro *", +artolo/e *", (lorecita *", =ourdes *", Julieta *", Rosita>(errera>*" and Renato *" 3efore the 7(%. Res!on"ents Rolando, Rosalino, =ucio, 0nri.ue, Rosauro, +artolo/e, Julieta, =ourdes and (lorecita are the children of *" +an# 3" his second /arria#e to Rosita (errera>*". Jose *" +an#, Julian and Osar are the children of *" +an# fro/ his first /arria#e to +a N#a no seriousl" that2s her na/e', and <enaida ;an and 1a. 0//a *" are the children of Jose *" +an# and %lu/inada ;an. Jose *" +an#, Julian, Oscar, <enaida and 1a. 0//a are the !etitioners. *" +an# died intestate, leavin# real and $ersonal $ro$erties, and several 3usinesses. ,urin# an out>of>court conference 3etween $etitioners and res$ondents, it was a#reed that the /ana#e/ent, su$ervision or ad/inistration of the estate shall 3e $laced te/$oraril" in the hands of Jose *" +an# as trustee, with authorit" to dele#ate so/e of his functions to an" of the $etitioners or res$ondents. Julian was dele#ated as 3oo55ee$er, and Rosauro /ana#ed and o$erated the cine/a of the co//on ownershi$. 0ver"one a#reed that the inco/e of the 3 cine/a houses =on# =ife, *+* and *">7o ;heaters' shall e4clusivel" $ertain to res$ondents for their su$$ort and sustenance, $endin# ter/ination of the case for -udicial $artition, and the inco/e fro/ the vast $arts of the estate and other 3usinesses of their dad, to $ertain e4clusivel" to the $etitioners. Res$ondents, throu#h Rosauro, too5 char#e of the 3 cine/a houses, with the inco/e evenl" divided a/on# the/selves. ;he -ud#e rendered a (irst Partial ,ecision 3ased on the 7o/$ro/ise 8#ree/ent su3/itted 3" Rolando, Jose *" +an# and Julian. ;he -ud#e ne4t rendered a *econd Partial ,ecision 3ased on the $retrial order of the court entered into 3" and 3etween Renato and $etitioner s$ouses % #uess that would 3e Jose *" +an# and %lu/inada ;an?'. ;he" 3oth 3eca/e final. 8 #$ir" %artia& 'ecision followed) 1' declarin# that all the $ro$erties, 3usinesses, inco/e, $roduce, i/$rove/ents, assets and all ri#hts, interests and $artici$ation in the na/es of Jose *" +an# and %lu/inada and their children, and Julian and his wife Rosa ;an, as 3elon#in# to *" +an#2s estate, includin# the $ro$erties in their na/es and those which the" /a" have concealed or fraudulentl" transferred 2' declarin# 1aria Rosita (errera>*" and her children 0nri.ue, +artolo/e, Rosalino, Rolando, Rosauro, 1aria =ourdes, (lorecita and Julieta, and Jose *" +an#, Julian, =ucio, Oscar and Renato children 3" *" +an#2s first wife' as heirs of *" +an# 3' orderin# $artition after the e4tent shall have 3een deter/ined at the conclusion of the $ro$er accountin# which the $arties shall render and after se#re#atin# and deliverin# to 1aria Rosita her half share in the con-u#al $artnershi$. 4' deferrin# resolution on the .uestion re#ardin# the inclusion for $artition of $ro$erties in the na/es of Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 0nri.ue Petitioners filed a 1otion to *us$end Proceedin#s and for %nhi3ition alle#in# that the -ud#e showed $artialit" in favor of their

co>defendants in the case. ,enied. ;he" filed a Petition for Prohi3ition and for %nhi3ition ,is.ualification' and 1anda/us with Restrainin# Order at the *u$re/e 7ourt. 0ver"thin# was denied e4ce$t /anda/us, which was noted. ;he -ud#e issued two orders) 1' 1rs. =ucita *ar/iento was a$$ointed as Receiver and $etitioners2 1otion for New ;rial and@or Reconsideration and their *u$$le/ental 1otion were denied for lac5 of /erit. 2' %//ediate cancellation of the lis $endens annotated at the 3ac5 of the certificates of title in the na/es of +artolo/e, Rosalino and Rolando ;7 a$$roved *ar/iento2s 3ond. 6hile the Petition for 1anda/us with Restrainin# Order was $endin# 3efore the *7, $etitioners filed a Petition for 7ertiorari and Prohi3ition 3efore the *7. 8 ;RO was issued to en-oin the -ud#e fro/ ta5in# an" action and restrained the effectivit" and co/$liance with the resolution den"in# the 1otion to *us$end Proceedin#s@%nhi3ition and the two orders. ;he Petition for 1anda/us with Restrainin# Order was withdrawn, and *ar/iento filed an Ar#ent 1anifestation and 1otion, which was o$$osed 3" the $etitioners. ;he 7ourt referred the $etition $ro3a3l" the certiorari one' to the 78. 78 dis/issed, holdin# that Jud#e Puno acted correctl" in issuin# the ;hird Partial ,ecision. ;he order to cancel the lis $endens annotation was li5ewise $ro$er. 1R denied. Petitioners filed a Petition for Review on 7ertiorari under Rule 43 3ut that was denied for failure to attach the re#istr" recei$t. 1R was #ranted. ;he" sou#ht nullification of the ;hird Partial ,ecision and the orders, and for the lower court to $roceed with the rece$tion of further evidence. Rosita (errera>*" filed a 1otion for Pa"/ent of 6idow2s 8llowance. *he alle#ed that *" +an# left an e4tensive estate. ;he $ro$erties were found to 3e their con-u#al $ro$erties. (ro/ *" +an#2s death until such filin#, Rosita had no widow2s allowance as $rovided in Rule B3, *ec. 3 #iven 3" the $arties in $ossession and control of her hus3and2s estate, or her share in the con-u#al $artnershi$. Petitioners said the sa/e is #ranted onl" durin# the settle/ent of the estate and the allowance shall 3e ta5en fro/ the Cco//on /ass of $ro$ert"D durin# the li.uidation of the inventoried $ro$erties. ;he case 3efore the ;7 is a s$ecial civil action under Rule E9 so Rosita is not entitled to the allowance. ;his /otion was #ranted and $etitioners were ordered -ointl" and severall" to $a" her P255 fro/ the *" +an# estate. %n a 1anifestation, $etitioners said that Rosita and 0nri.ue had e4ecuted a waiver of $ast, $resent and future clai/s a#ainst the/ and should 3e dro$$ed as $arties. %n a *inu/$aan# *ala"sa", Rosita and 0nri.ue said the" were #iven P11 and a $arcel of land for which reason the" were withdrawin#. Res$ondents, 3esides 0nri.ue, filed a 7ounter>1anifestation and O$$osition to dro$ Rosita, 3ecause it would 3e ridiculous for her to #ive u$ her share in the estate, a/ountin# to hundreds of /illions of $esos, which had alread" 3een ordered $artitioned. *he was su$$osedl" not in $ossession of her full facilities when she affi4ed her thu/3/ar5 on the *inu/$aan# *ala"sa" considerin# her a#e, fre.uent illness, and lac5 of a3ilit" to read or write. ;he" filed a $etition 3efore the R;7 for (uar"ians$i! (%N8==F *O10;9%N: 8+OA; :A8R,%8N*9%P' over her $erson and $ro$erties, alle#in# that 0nri.ue and so/e of Jose *" +an#2s 5ids would stealthil" visit Rosita at Rosauro2s house while the latter was awa", and on one occasion, she was as5ed to affi4 her thu/3/ar5. Rosita never received an"thin#. Petitioners said that the res$ondents had no evidence and the ** was dul" notari&ed and thus a $u3lic docu/ent with the $resu/$tion of validit". ;he 7ounter>1anifestation was filed without her authori&ation as she even wanted it withdrawn. Rosita even intended to o$$ose the $etition for #uardianshi$ and $etitioners $resented a co$" of a sworn certification fro/ her $h"sician statin# that she is $h"sicall" fit and /entall" co/$etent. ;he" filed 1R of the 7ourt2s Resolution #rantin# her widow2s allowance. ;he 1R alle#ed that Rosita and 0nri.ue e4ecuted their ** 3efore the Resolution 3ut this was onl" /ade 5nown to the 7ourt in Octo3erG the Resolution was rendered in *e$te/3er so the 7ourt was not aware of it then. Res$ondents even tried to de/onstrate that their /o/ would thu/3/ar5 an" docu/ent her children as5ed her to 3" e4hi3itin# four docu/ents deno/inated as ** and thu/3/ar5ed accordin#l". One even tried to disown the earlier **. ;he second was a re$roduction of the ** with the a/ount chan#ed to P100. ;he third $ur$orted to 3e.ueath her shares in the 7P: to Rosauro, +artolo/e, Rolando, and Rosalino, while refusin# to #ive an" to (lorecita, =ourdes, Julieta and 0nri.ue. ;he fourth contradicted the third 3" reversin# the $arties. 1R denied. Petitioners filed a *u$$le/ent to their 1e/orandu/ ar#uin# that the ;hird Partial ,ecision did not onl" undul" 3ind the $ro$erties without due $rocess 3ut also i#nored the rule on indefeasi3ilit" of ;orrens titles. Facts Case 2 5a"a $a, #u"s? ,i $a ta"o ta$osH' Res$ondents filed a )oint %etition *or t$e Guar"ians$i! o* t$e Inco+!etent Rosita Ferrera,S- 3efore the R;7. Rosauro wanted to 3e the s$ecial #uardian so he filed 3efore the #uardianshi$ court a 1otion to Order 7ourt ,e$osit of 6idow2s 8llowance Ordered 3" the *u$re/e 7ourt, and a 1otion 3efore the *7 see5in# an Order for $etitioners to $a" Rosita widow2s allowance and should the" fail to co/$l" the" should 3e i/$risoned.

;he #uardianshi$ court ordered $etitioners to de$osit the widow2s allowance. 1R was denied. Rosauro as5ed the court to issue a writ of e4ecution, while $etitioners certiorari2d to the 78, 3ut that $roved to 3e futile. 1R was also denied. 9ence, $etition for review under Rule 45. ;he" ar#ued that the #uardianshi$ court2s -urisdiction was onl" li/ited to deter/inin# 6ON Rosita was inco/$etent and, if so, a$$ointin# a #uardian. Ander Rule B3, *ec. 3, widow2s allowance can onl" 3e $aid in an estate $roceedin# and assu/in# a $artition $roceedin# counts, onl" the trial court hearin# the $artition case would have the -urisdiction to e4ecute the $a"/ent. Petitioners also assail the re/oval of the $hrase Cto 3e ta5en fro/ the estate of *" +an#D fro/ the order, which /eans the widow2s allowance will now 3e ta5en fro/ their own $ro$erties. +ut 3efore the 7ourt could /a5e a decision in these now>consolidated cases, Rosauro filed a /otion for de$osit in the *7 of the widow2s allowance and u$on failure of the $etitioners, their i/$rison/ent should 3e ordered. 9e alle#ed that his /o/ had 3een ill and had no /eans to su$$ort herself e4ce$t throu#h financial assistance, and res$ondents had not co/$lied with the 7ourt2s Resolution for seven "ears. ;he #uardianshi$ court2s findin# of indirect conte/$t did not hel$ 3ecause Rosita was still una3le to collect her widow2s allowance. ;his /otion was #ranted, findin# %lu/inada, her children with Jose *" +an# now deceased' and <enaida, 1a. 0//a, Julian and Julian2s wife Rosa ;an, #uilt" of conte/$t. %lu/inada, <enaida and 1a. 0//a $aid the court fine. Res$ondents, e4ce$t Rosauro also dead now', filed a 1otion for 04ecution while Rosa ;an filed 1R with clarification. *he alle#ed that in accordance with 7hinese culture, she had no $artici$ation in the /ana#e/ent of the fa/il" 3usiness or *" +an#2s estate. *he alle#edl" inherited nothin# 3ut de3ts and lia3ilities and had no inco/e of her own, so she did not 5now how to $a" for those de3ts and lia3ilities. %lu/inada, <enaida and 1a. 0//a also filed 1R with clarification, sa"in# that the P11 and the $iece of land Rosita had alread" received should 3e $art of the widow2s allowance. ;he" also ar#ued that the allowance should 3e $aid fro/ the estate and it was unfair to /a5e the/ $a" when none of the/ $artici$ated in the /ana#e/ent of the estate I <enaida and 1a. 0//a were /inors at the ti/e *" +an# $ushed u$ daisies, and %lu/inada and Rosa had no si#nificant role in the fa/il" 3usiness. Res$ondents filed another /otion for an order re.uirin# $etitioners to de$osit the widow2s allowance ano 3a, $an#>ilan na 3a to' and a /otion for e4ecution. :ranted. 1R denied. 8nd a#ain, %lu/inada, <enaida and 1a. 0//a filed a 1anifestation of 7o/$liance and 1otion for 7larification, /aintainin# that the issues in the 1R had not 3een dul" resolved. 6hen the 7ourt issued its Resolution wa" wa" 3ac5 in 199E re#ardin# the $a"/ent of widow2s allowance #ranted', it was not "et aware that Rosita had e4ecuted the **. ;he #uardianshi$ court had also issued an order reco#ni&in# a te/$orar" a#ree/ent 3ased on Jose *" +an#2s voluntar" offer of financial assistance for Rosita. 8s a /anifestation of #ood faith, %, < and 10 $aid out of their own funds in $artial co/$liance 3ut it will not constitute a waiver of their ri#hts in the $resent case. ;he allowance /ust still co/e fro/ the estate or *" +an#2s heirs still undeter/ined'. ;he lia3ilit" for such allowance /ust 3e e.uall" divided 3etween the/ and the other $etitioners, heirs of Julian. Res$ondents filed a /otion as5in# for an order for the i//ediate incarceration of the $etitioners for refusin# to co/$l" with the 7ourt2s resolution, and the $eriod within which the" were to do so had alread" la$sed. Petitioners2 counsel, 8tt". Jo"as, should also 3e cited for conte/$t of court or violations of the 7anons of Professional Res$onsi3ilit". ,es$ite the finalit" of the 7ourt2s denial of $etitioners2 1R, he still filed a 1anifestation with co/$liance ar#uin# the sa/e thin#s. 8nd he never for/all" entered his a$$earance 3efore the 7ourt. ;hat /otion to refer hi/ to the %+P was denied for 3ein# a wron# re/ed". %, < and 10 filed an O/ni3us 1otion for an e4tension of ti/e to co/$l" with the Resolution, and 1otion to delete the $enalt" of CfineD as a conse.uence of voluntar" co/$liance. ;he" also ar#ued that C-oint and severalD in the Resolution creates individual lia3ilit" for each of the $arties for the full a/ount and Ccollectivel"D /eans that all the /e/3ers of the #rou$ are res$onsi3le to#ether for the action of the #rou$, so Ccollectivel"D /eans the lia3ilit" 3elon#s e.uall" to the two #rou$s of $etitioners. ;he" wanted E0 /ore da"s to raise the a/ount and as5ed that their i/$rison/ent 3e held in a3e"ance. +arel" a /onth later, $etitioners, throu#h new counsel, clai/ed that *" +an#2s /arria#e to Rosita (errera is void. wow the"2re des$erate' Res$ondents have falsified docu/ents to lead the courts into 3elievin# that said /arria#e was valid. ;he O/ni3us 1otion was denied and res$ondents filed a 1otion to %//ediatel" Order %ncarceration of Petitioners. O3viousl" $etitioners o$$osed. ;he 7ourt issued a warrant of arrest a#ainst $etitioners and directed the N+% to detain the/ (%N8==F' until the" co/$lied. Rosa ;an filed a 1anifestation with 1otion. ;o show that she was not o3stinate, she had 3e##ed and $leaded with her relatives to raise /one" to co/$l" 3ut onl" raised a s/all a/ount 3ecause she had no source of inco/e herself 3oo hoo wah wah'. *he #ot her 3rother2s hel$ and the latter issued chec5s. *he was su$$osedl" not infor/ed 3" her hus3and2s counsel of the develo$/ents in the case, and a#ain she had no $artici$ation in the estate and received nothin# of value when her hus3and died. ,0N%0,. %n an Ar#ent 1anifestation of 7o/$liance with the 7onte/$t Resolutions with Pa"/ent of 6idow2s 8llowance with Pra"er Reiteratin# the =iftin# of 6arrant of 8rrest on 9u/anitarian :rounds, %, < and 10 as5ed the 7ourt to delete the $enalt" of indefinite i/$rison/ent 3ecause of $artial co/$liance. ;he" e4$ressed willin#ness to de$osit the allowance with the *7 7ashier $endin# deter/ination of *" +an#2s estate. ;hat /one" was their own, not fro/ the estate, and would 3e de$osited to

erase their $enalt". ;he" are onl" hesitatin# to co/$l" 3ecause of $endin# incidents such as the falsification char#es a#ainst Rosita, the resolution of the $artition case, the **, and the $endenc" of #uardianshi$ $roceedin#s as well as hu/anitarian considerations. ;he 7ourt lifted the warrant of arrest on the condition that %, <, 10, and R; issue chec5s and su3/it $roof of co/$liance within 10 da"s. ;he" infor/ed the 7ourt that the" did so. Res$ondents said those chec5s did not a/ount to full co/$liance. %, <, and 10 filed a 1otion to include Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 9eirs of 0nri.ue as li5ewise lia3le for $a"/ent of widow2s allowance, 3ecause the" /a" hold so/e of *" +an#2s assets>$ro$erties. ;he" ar#ue denial of e.ual $rotection 3ecause the 7ourt sin#led out Jose *" +an# and Julian, and their heirs, as res$onsi3le for the allowance, not ta5in# into consideration the rest of the estate, co/$ro/ise a#ree/ents transferrin# $ro$erties to Rolando and Renato, and .uitclai/s and waivers e4ecuted 3" other /e/3ers over their shares in the estate for certain considerations. Petitioners also said that on 3 occasions the" tried to su3/it 12 $ostdated chec5s to the *7 cashiers 3ut the" were refused due to the $olic" of not issuin# recei$ts on $ostdated chec5s. ;he" filed a /otion 3efore the R;7 $ra"in# for authorit" to de$osit with the ;7, and it was #ranted on 1R. ;he" also alle#ed that there is now a Resolution 3" the Re#ional *tate Prosecutor findin# $ro3a3le cause to char#e res$ondents with falsification of 3 /arria#e contracts 3etween *" +an# and Rosita (errera, and this constitutes a hi#hl" $re-udicial .uestion on 6ON the" should $a" widow2s allowance. ;he filin# of the infor/ation is enou#h to cast dou3t on 6ON Rosita is entitled to the allowance. Res$ondents said the R;7 had alread" decided that *" +an#2s estate was co/$rised of $ro$erties in the na/es of Jose *" +an#, %lu/inada, <enaida, 1a. 0//a, Julian and Rosa ;an, and this was affir/ed 3" the 78. Petitioners2 clai/ that the estate is still undeter/ined is therefore false. Petitioners clai/ to 3e $oor 3ut hold enor/ous $ro$erties of the estate transferred to their na/es throu#h falsification of $u3lic docu/ents. ;he validit" of their /o/2s /arria#e to *" +an# has also 3een reco#ni&ed in several cases. ;he" filed a 1otion for *u3stitution of Parties, averrin# that Jose *" +an# died leavin# his widow %lu/inada and 14 children, while Julian died, leavin# widow Rosa and B children. ;he clai/s a#ainst Jose and Julian would not 3e e4tin#uished. Petitioners failed to infor/ the 7ourt of these deaths, which should 3e a #round for disci$linar" action. Res$ondents $ra"ed that the 7ourt order the heirs to a$$ear in court and 3e su3stituted. 1otion for *u3stitution #ranted. 7ourt noted the 7o//ent and 1anifestation on the 1otion to include Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando, and 9eirs of 0nri.ue as li5ewise lia3le. Res$ondents filed a 1anifestation and 1otion for i/$le/entation of the Resolutions for $a"/ent of widow2s allowance. %, < and 10 refused to 3ac5 down and ar#ued that the" were all issued $rior to the ,OJ resolution findin# $ro3a3le cause to file falsification char#es a#ainst the res$ondents. ;he cri/inal cases e4$ose Rosita as a C/ereD co//on>law wife and not a CwidowD, thus no le#al -ustification to #ive the allowance to her. Rosa ;an ar#ued that since the ;7 had alread" a$$ointed a -udicial ad/inistrator for *" +an#2s estate, which includes Julian2s estate, the $ro$er $art" to 3e su3stituted should 3e the ad/inistrator and not Julian2s heirs, who had never e4ercised ownershi$ ri#hts over the $ro$erties. 7ourt had enou#h of their shenani#ans and denied the 1R to the Resolution #rantin# su3stitution of $arties. Issues Case 1. ,id the 78 err in u$holdin# the ;hird Partial ,ecision deferrin# the resolution on the .uestion of the $ro$erties in the na/e of Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 0nri.ue? NO' 2. ,id the -ud#e err in a$$ointin# a receiver? NO' 3. 6as the order cancelin# the notice of lis $endens $ro$er? F0*' Issue Case 2 ,id the :uardianshi$ 7ourt e4ceed its -urisdiction in directin# the de$osit of the widow2s allowance? F0*' 'is!osition Petition in first case denied, $etition in second case #ranted. R;7 directed to hear and decide the settle/ent case. ;R0+=0 7O*;* 8:8%N*; P0;%;%ON0R*. Reasonin( Case nothin# a3out #uardianshi$ here' 1. Rule 3E, *ec. 4 allows a court, in an action a#ainst several defendants, to render -ud#/ent a#ainst one or /ore of the/, leavin# the action to $roceed a#ainst the others. ;he ;hird Partial ,ecision is in the nature of a several -ud#/ent, which is $ro$er when the lia3ilit" of each $art" is clearl" se$ara3le and distinct fro/ that of his co>$arties, and the clai/s a#ainst each of the/ could have 3een the su3-ect of se$arate suits, and -ud#/ent for or a#ainst one of the/ will not necessaril" affect the other. 8lthou#h sued collectivel", $etitioners each held a se$arate and se$ara3le interest in the estate. ;hat the $ro$erties in the na/es of the $etitioners were found to 3e $art of the *" +an# estate did not $reclude further findin#s on the status of the $ro$erties in the na/es of the other heirs. ;he hearin# set was for deter/inin# the $ur$ose of deter/inin# whether $ro$erties in the na/es of 0nri.ue, +artolo/e, Rosalino, Rolando and@or their res$ective wives were also $art of the *" +an# estate. ;he ;7 re.uired further evidence to 3e #uided in $artition and ad-udication of the ri#htful share and interest of the heirs. ;hus, the estate cannot 3e $artitioned or distri3uted until the final deter/ination of the e4tent of the estate and onl" until it is shown that the o3li#ations under Rule

90, *ec. 1, have 3een settled. %n the settle/ent of estate $roceedin#s, the distri3ution of the estate $ro$erties can onl" 3e /ade) a' after all de3ts, funeral char#es, e4$enses of ad/inistration, allowance to the widow, and estate ta4 have 3een $aid 3' 3efore $a"/ent of said o3li#ations onl" if the distri3utees or an" of the/ #ive a 3ond fi4ed 3" the court conditioned u$on $a"/ent of said o3li#ations ;he issue of ownershi$ or co>ownershi$ /ust first 3e resolved to effect a $artition of $ro$erties and should 3e done in the action for $artition. ;he court cannot $ro$erl" issue an order to divide the $ro$ert" unless it deter/ines the e4istence of co> ownershi$. 8n action for $artition will not lie if the clai/ant has no ri#htful interest over the su3-ect $ro$ert". ;he ;hird Partial ,ecision also does not ter/inate the $roceedin#s for $artition. %t is 3ut a deter/ination 3ased on the evidence $resented so far. ;here re/ained issues to 3e resolved 3" the court. 2. 7ounsel for $etitioners were a3le to su3/it their o$$osition to the $etition for the a$$oint/ent of a receiver so $etitioners cannot sa" the" were de$rived of due $rocess. ;he -ud#e a$$ointed the receiver after 3oth $arties $resented evidence and after the $ro/ul#ation of the ;hird Partial ,ecision. ;he a$$oint/ent was /ade u$on verified $etition of the res$ondents, who alle#ed that $etitioners were /is/ana#in# the $ro$erties in liti#ation and said $ro$erties were in dan#er of 3ein# lost, wasted, dissi$ated, /isused or dis$osed of. ;he -ud#e acted correctl" in #rantin# the a$$oint/ent of a receiver to $reserve the $ro$erties, and did not act ar3itraril" or a3use his discretion. Petitioners actuall" violated the status .uo sou#ht to 3e /aintained 3" their intrusion and unwarranted sei&ure of the 3 theaters. 3. 8t an" ti/e after final -ud#/ent in favor of the defendant or other dis$osition of the action that would ter/inate the ri#hts of the $laintiff in the $ro$erties involved, the notice of lis $endens which was re#istered shall 3e dee/ed canceled u$on re#istration of the certificate of the cler5 of court in which the action or $roceedin# was $endin#, statin# the /anner of dis$osal. ;he filin# of a notice of lis $endens has a two>fold effect) a' to 5ee$ the su3-ect /atter of the liti#ation within the $ower of the court until entr" of final -ud#/ent to $revent the final -ud#/ent fro/ 3ein# defeated 3" successive alienation 3' to 3ind a $urchaser of the land to the -ud#/ent or decree to 3e $ro/ul#ated su3se.uentl" ;he ;7 has inherent $ower to cancel such notice 3ut it can onl" 3e canceled on two #rounds Rule 13, *ec. 14') a' the annotation was for /olestin# the title of the adverse $art" 3' the annotation is not necessar" to $rotect the title of the $art" who caused it to 3e recorded. %t does not affect the /erits 3ut is onl" for constructivel" warnin# all $eo$le who deal with the $ro$ert" that the" so deal with it at their own ris5 and whatever ri#hts the" ac.uire are su3-ect to the results of the action. ;he cancellation of such a $recautionar" notice is also a /ere incident and /a" 3e ordered 3" the court havin# -urisdiction at an" #iven ti/e. Rosalino, +artolo/e and Rolando were a3le to $rove that the notice was intended to /olest and harass the owners of the $ro$ert", so/e of who/ were not $arties to the case. ;he interest of Oscar, who caused the annotation, was onl" 1@14 of the assessed value of the $ro$ert". Rosalino, +artolo/e and Rolando had also 3een ordered to $ost a 3ond to $rotect Oscar2s ri#hts and interests. Reasonin( Case 2 %1POR;8N;' ;he #uardianshi$ court had li/ited -urisdiction, which does not e4tend to enforcin# $a"/ent of widow2s allowance ordered 3" the court. ;he clai/ for widow2s allowance was /ade 3efore the *7 in a case that did not arise fro/ #uardianshi$ $roceedin#s I which is still $endin# 3efore the R;7 the settle/ent of the estate'. 8ccordin# to Rule B3, *ec. 3, the widow and /inor or inca$acitated children of a deceased $erson, durin# the settle/ent of the estate, shall receive therefro/, under the direction of the court, such allowance as are $rovided 3" law. 8rt. 1BB, 77) (ro/ the co//on /ass of $ro$ert" su$$ort shall 3e #iven to the survivin# s$ouse and to the children durin# the li.uidation of the inventoried $ro$ert" and until what 3elon#s to the/ is deliveredG 3ut fro/ this shall 3e deducted that a/ount received for su$$ort which e4ceeds the fruits or rents $ertainin# to the/. ;he CcourtD referred to in Rule B3, *ec. 3 is the court hearin# the settle/ent of the estate. 8lso cr"stal clear is the $rovision that the widow2s allowance is to 3e ta5en fro/ the co//on /ass of $ro$ert" for/in# $art of the estate of the decedent. ;herefore, it is the court hearin# the settle/ent that should effect the $a"/ent of the widow2s allowance, considerin# that the $ro$erties of the estate are within its -urisdiction, to the e4clusion of all other courts. :enerall", the #uardianshi$ court e4ercisin# s$ecial and li/ited -urisdiction cannot actuall" order the deliver" of the $ro$ert" of the ward found to 3e e/3e&&led, concealed or conve"ed. Onl" in e4tre/e cases, where $ro$ert" clearl" 3elon#s to the ward or where his title has 3een -udiciall" decided, /a" the court direct its deliver" to the #uardian. ;here can onl" 3e return or deliver" when the ri#ht or title of the ward is clear and indis$uta3le. 6here the title is in dis$ute, the deter/ination of the title or ri#ht /ust 3e ventilated in a se$arate ordinar" action.

;he distri3ution of the residue of the estate of the deceased inco/$etent is a function $ertainin# not to the #uardianshi$ $roceedin#s 3ut to another $roceedin# in which the heirs are at li3ert" to initiate. Re) $a"/ent of widow2s allowance %t has 3een 13 "ears since the $etitioners were ordered to $a" Rosita her /onthl" widow2s allowance. %lu/inada, <enaida and 1a. 0//a have since fou#ht tooth and nail a#ainst $a"in#, #rud#in#l" co/$l"in# onl" u$on threat of incarceration. ;hen the" ar#ued a#ain after ,OJ issued its Resolution findin# $ro3a3le cause in the falsification char#es a#ainst the res$ondents. ;he" contended that the cri/inal cases $roved that Rosita is a co//on>law wife. 9owever, a findin# of $ro3a3le cause does not conclusivel" $rove the char#e of falsification. Pro3a3le cause is Cthe e4istence of such facts and circu/stances as would e4cite the 3elief, in a reasona3le /ind, actin# on the facts within the 5nowled#e of the $rosecutor, that the $erson char#ed was #uilt" of the cri/e for which he was $rosecuted.D 8 findin# of $ro3a3le cause needs to rest onl" on evidence showin# that /ore li5el" than not a cri/e has 3een c//itted and was co//itted 3" the sus$ects. %t need not 3e 3ased on clear and convincin# evidence of #uilt, neither on evidence esta3lishin# #uilt 3e"ond reasona3le dou3t, and definitel" not on evidence esta3lishin# a3solute certaint" of #uilt. Antil the /arria#e is declared void, it is $resu/ed valid and Rosita is entitled to receive her widow2s allowance. Petitioners are dut">3ound to co/$l" with whatever the courts, in relation to $ro$erties under liti#ation, /a" order. Re) 1otion to include Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 9eirs of 0nri.ue as li5ewise lia3le to $a" widow2s allowance ,enied. ;he widow2s allowance is char#ea3le to *" +an#2s estate. ;he issue of 6ON the $ro$erties in the na/es of Rosalino, +artolo/e, Rolando and 0nri.ue for/ $art of the estate re/ains unsettled 3ecause the $etition .uestionin# the ;72s ;hird Partial ,ecision has 3een $endin#. +ut there has 3een a cate#orical $ronounce/ent that $etitioners are holdin# $ro$erties 3elon#in# to *" +an#2s estate. (%N8= NO;0 a.5.a. Justice Nachura is not ha$$" either a3out this case 6e are a$$alled 3" the dela" in the dis$osition of this case 3rou#ht a3out 3" $etitionersJ $ro$ensit" to challen#e the 7ourtJs ever" directive. ;hat the $etitioners would #o to e4tre/e len#ths to evade co/$l"in# with their duties under the law and the orders of this 7ourt is trul" de$lora3le. Not even a citation for conte/$t and the threat of i/$rison/ent see/ed to deter the/. ;heir contu/acious attitude and actions have dra##ed this case for far too lon# with $racticall" no end in si#ht. ;heir a3use of le#al and court $rocesses is sha/eful, and the" /ust not 3e allowed to continue with their atrocious 3ehavior. Petitioners deserve to 3e sanctioned, and ordered to $a" the 7ourt tre3le costs. ,i#est 3" Kat