Rule 80 Case #4

ALIPIO VS. CA
Ponente: Mendoza, J.

Facts:
Respondent Romeo Jaring was the lessee of a 14.5 hectare fishpond in Barito, Mabuco, Hermosa,
Bataan. The lease was for period of 5 yrs ended on June 19, 1987, he subleased the fishpond, for the
remaining period of his lease, to the spouses Placido and Purita Alipio and the Spouses Bienvinido and
Remedios Manuel. The stipulated amount of rent was P 495, 600. 00, payable in two instalments of
P300, 00.00 and P185,600.00, with the second instalment falling due on June 30, 1989. Each of the
subleases signed the contract. The first instalment was duly paid however the on second instalment the
subleases only satisfied the portion thereof leaving an unpaid balance of P50,000.00. Despite of the
demand the subleases failed to comply. On Oct. 13, 1989, the private respondent sued Alipio and
Manuel spouses for the collection of the said amount before the RTC of Dagupan and also prayed for the
recession of the contract in case the defdendants failed to pay. Petitioner Purita moved to dismiss the
case on the ground that her husband Placido Alipio passed away before the judgment of the case and
alleged that she cant be a party to the case since her husband died and the debt is not chargeable to
their conjugal property.

Issue:
Won private respondent can file a case against the petitioner/ whether the creditor can sue the
surviving spouse for a collection of debt which is owned by the conjugal partnership gains

RULING: The petition is meritorious.

The creditor cannot sue the surviving spouse of a decedent in an ordinary proceeding for the
collection of sum of money chargeable against the conjugal partnership and that the proper remedy id
to claim in a settlement of estate of the decedent.

The private respondent cannot maintain a present suit with the petitioner. Rather, his remedy is to
file a claim against Alipios in the proceeding for the settlement of the estate of petitioners husband or,
if non commenced, he can file a petition either for the issuance of letters of administration of for the
allowance of will depending on whether the husband died testate or intestate. The petitioner cannot
short circuit this procedure by lumping his claim chargeable against it can be paid. Needless to say
estate, the inventory of the Alipios conjugal is necessary before any claim chargeable against it can be
paid. Needless to say, such power exclusively pertains to the court having jurisdiction over the
settlement of the decedents estate and not to any court.