THIRD DIVISION 1.
Gonzales is a “complete stranger
G.R. No. L-44888 February 7, 1992
PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM
CORPORATION, petitioner,
vs.
FIDEL P. DUMLAO, Judge of the Court
of First Instance of Agusan Del Norte
and Butuan City, BONIFACIO
CANONOY, Judicial Administrator of
the Estate of Regino Canonoy,
CARMEN VDA. DE CANONOY,
TEODULO CANONOY, REGINO
CANONOY, JR., MARIANITA CANONOY
GUINTO and GLORIA CANONOY
BASA, respondents.
Dominguez & Paderna Law Offices Co. for
petitioner.
Wenceslao B. Rosales for private
respondents.
DAVIDE, JR., J.:
Facts:
Ricardo Gonzales, District Manager of
Shell Philippines for Mindanao, filed a
petition entitled, “In the Matter of the
Intestate Estate of the Deceased
ReginoiCanonoy, Petition for Letters of
Administration, Ricardo M. Gonzales,
Petitioner” with the RTC of Agusan del
Norte and Butuan City, praying that he be
appointed as judicial administrator of the
estate of the deceased ReginoCanonoy.
Judge Echavez Jr. issued an order setting
the hearing on the petition and directing
the hearing on the petition and directing
that said order be published and copies of
the same be sent by registered mail or
personal delivery to each of all known
heirs of the deceased.
The heirs of the deceased opposed the
issuance of letters of administration filed
by Gonzales based on the following
grounds:
to the intestate estate” of the
deceased;
2. He is not even a creditor of the
estate but a mere employee of an
alleged creditor (Shell Philippines,
Inc.) and so “he would not be able
to properly and effectively protect
the interest of the estate in case of
conflicts”; and
3. He is a resident of Davao City, and
thus if appointed as administrator
of the estate, the bulk of which is
located in Butuan City, “he would
not be able to perform his duties
efficiently”.
The heirs instead propose and pray that
BonifacioCanonoy, one of the deceased’s
sons, be appointed administrator of the
said intestate estate and that the
corresponding letters of administration be
issued in his favour. The trial court, after
due hearing, appointed BonifacioCanonoy
as administrator of the estate of the
deceased.
Petitioner Shell filed its claim against the
estate of the deceased. Upon joinder of
the issues on the said claim, the trial court
set the pre-trial. The administrator filed a
Motion to Dismiss the claim alleging that
the court did not acquire jurisdiction over
the subject matter and nature thereof
because the petitioner therein, Mr.
Gonzales, is not the “interested person” as
contemplated by Rule 79, Section 2 of the
Rules of Court. Petitioner Shell countered
the motion, contending that the interest of
Mr. Gonzales in the estate is not a
jurisdictional fact that needs to be alleged
in the petition.
Respondent Judge granted the motion
and dismissed the case.
Issue:
Whether or not the jurisdictional facts that
need to be stated in a petition for letter of
administration under Rule 79, Section 2 of
the Rules of Court include the specific
assertion that the petitioner therein is an
“interested person”
Ruling: Private respondents’ failure to move for a
dismissal amounted to a waiver of the
No. Rule 79, Section 2 of the Rules of abovementioned ground. Rule 15, Section
Court provides: 8 of the Rules of Court provides that:

Section 2. Contents of petition of letters of “A motion attacking a pleading or a

administration – A petition for letters of
administration must be files by an
interested person and must show, so far
as known to the petitioner:
a) The jurisdictional facts;
b) The names, ages, and residences
of the heirs, and the names and
residences of the creditors, of the
decedent;
c) The probable value and character
of the property of the estate;
d) The name of the person for whom
letters of administration are
prayed.
proceeding shall include all objections
then available, and all objections not so
included shall be deemed waived.”
By proposing that BonifacioCanonoy be
appointed as administrator instead of Mr.
Gonzales, private respondents have in
fact approved or ratified the filing of the
petition by the latter. There can be no
dispute that the trial court had acquired
jurisdiction over the case.

But no defect in the petition shall render

void the issuance of letters of
administration.

The jurisdictional facts alluded to are: the

death of the testator, his residence at the
time of his death in the province where the
probate court is sitting or, if he is an
inhabitant of a foreign country, his having
left his estate in such province. These
facts are amply enumerated in the petition
filed by Mr. Gonzales.

Clearly, the allegation that a petitioner

seeking letters of administration is an
interested person does not fall within the
enumeration of jurisdictional facts. A
Motion to Dismiss may lie not on the basis
of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the
court, but rather on the ground of lack of
legal capacity to institute the proceedings.

In Saguinsin vs. Lindayag, the Court

defined an “interested party” as one who
would be benefitted by the estate, such as
an heir or one who has a claim against the
estate, such as a creditor; this interest
must be material and direct, not merely
indirect or contingent. As an exemption,
an objection to a petition for letters of
administration on that ground may be
barred by waiver or estoppel.