Title: VILLAMOR V COURT OF APPEALS

Citation: G.R. No. L-41508 June 27, 1988

Facts:
Spouses Victor Cortes and Maria Castañeda had eight (8) children in which six died single and without issue.
Barbara Cortes, one of the children, begot a son by the name of Eustaquio Cortes. Rufino Cortes, another child of
the spouses, died on June 1909 left two alleged legitimate children, Ireneo Cortes Villamor and Paula Cortes
Villamor. The last to die of the Cortes children was Eugenia Cortes. She died on January 1931. Eustaquio Cortes,
son of Barbara, married one Sixta Ceniza. Born to them were five children, all surnamed Cortes. All five remained
unmarried and died without will nor forced heirs. Dionisio, Amancia and Agapita predeceased their father
Eustaquio. Eustaquio died on October 1932, survived by his spouse and two sons, Bartolome and Nicanor.
Bartolome who was a Catholic priest, died on November 1937. Nicanor Cortes, also known as Father Gabriel Maria
Cortes, died as a monk of the Carthusian Order in Barcelona, Spain on August 1969. He was the last of the direct
descendants of the Barbara Cortes line. On the other hand, Paula Villamor, alleged daughter of Rufino Cortes, died
single on January 1967 and without issue. In a Special Proceedings for the settlement of Bartolome’estate, Fr.
Diosdado Camomot, a close friend of Bartolome, was named administrator. On September 27, 1938, Paula Cortes
Villamor and Ireneo Cortes Villamor, claiming to be the legitimate children of Rufino Cortes, filed a petition for the
administration of the estate of Rufino Cortes, under Special Proceedings No. 343-C. On April 14, 1948, Judge S. C.
Moscoso approved the project of partition, and on September 30, 1948, the administrators delivered the seven
parcels of land to Ireneo and Paula Villamor.

On October 1954, Fr. Cortes executed a power of attorney before the Vice-Consul of the Republic of the
Philippines in Spain, constituting and appointing Fr. Diosdado Camomot as his attorney-in-fact. On May 1962, Fr.
Nicanor Cortes executed a Deed of Conveyance in favor of several persons wherein he conveyed ten parcels of
land which included those received by his mother under the Project of Partition. In the complaint, respondent
alleged inter alia that upon learning of the death of Fr. Nicanor Cortes, some of his nearest of kin who are his
surviving first cousins, the Cenizas [all from the side of Sixta Ceniza] initiated Special Proceedings No. 3062-R for
the settlement of the estate of the deceased monk; that prior to and in the course of initiating said proceedings,
the surviving first cousins came upon documents showing that Fr. Cortes during his absence from the Philippines to
pursue a monastic life was deprived of his inheritance by fraud, stealth and stratagem perpetrated by Paula and
Ireneo Villamor Petitioners, instead of filing an answer, filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that the cause of action is
barred by prior judgment and by the statute of limitations.

Issue:
1. Whether or not the partition can be annulled on the ground of fraud
2. Whether or not a stanger may be appointed as administrator.

Ruling:
1. No

In his testimony, Fr. DiosdadoCamomot declared categorically that he informed Fr. Nicanor Cortes about Special
Proceedings No. 343 and that he sent him a copy of the project of partition. Highly significant is the fact that
among the witnesses who testified before the trial court, it was only Fr. Camomot who had personal knowledge of
the events leading to the execution of the project of partition. Notwithstanding, the trial court, instead of
according great weight to his testimony, summarily brushed it aside and even reached the unwarranted conclusion
that he was in collusion with Ireneo and Paula Villamor. The testimony of Fr. Diosdado Camomot, however, is too
detailed and straightforward to be a mere product of concoction or fabrication or a device to cover-up the
collusion imputed to him by the trial court. Furthermore, said testimony is corroborated by other evidence on
record that sustains its veracity. That he communicated with Fr. Nicanor Cortes was corroborated by Roure Ceniza-
Sanchez, a witness for therein plaintiff-administratrix Daniela CenizaUrot. She testified that being the
administrator, it was Fr. Camomot who informed Fr. Nicanor Cortes about the properties of his parents. In the
Deed of Conveyance dated May 9, 1962 executed by Fr. Nicanor Cortes, wherein he ceded and transferred ten [10]
parcels of land in favor of several persons. The portions of Fr. Cortes' letters and Deed of Conveyance show beyond
any iota of doubt that he was kept posted on the developments in the Philippines. He know that his mother
received some lands as "share" and that Candelario had acquired lands. By reason of this circumstance, Fr. Nicanor
Cortes is charged with knowledge of Special Proceedings Nos. 262 and 343 as well as the Project of Petition.

2. Yes.

The Court do not consider as "intriguing" the observation of the lower court and concurred in by the Court of
Appeals that in both Special Proceedings in question, the administrators appointed were complete strangers to the
decedents. There is nothing repulsive in this nor is this an indicium of fraud and collusion as found by the courts.
Section 642 of the Code of Civil Procedure enumerates the persons who can act as executors and administrators. It
provides that in case the persons who have the preferential right to be appointed are not competent or are
unwilling to serve, administration may be granted to such other person as the court may appoint.