B.

Venue in judicial settlement of estate

1. de Borja vs. Tan 97 Phil 872 (1955)
De Borja v Tan, GR No. L6476 (1955)

Petitioner: Francisco De Borja

Respondent: Bienvinido Tan As Judge of CFI and Jose de Borja

FACTS:

Francisco de Borja filed a petition with the lower court for the probate of the Will and testament of his deceased
wife Josefa Tangco. He was subsequently named executor of the estate. Jose de Borja appealed the case to the
Court of Appeals.Due to Physical inability of Francisco to fully administer the estate, lower court appointed
Crisanto de Borja as co-administrator on the petition of Matilde de Borja. However on April 1952, the trial court
without the petition or notice appointed Jose de Borja as co-administrator. Francisco, Matilde and Crisanto filed
an MR but the judge denied the same. On July 1952, Francisco, Matilde, and Crisanto filed a notice of appeal
from the order appointing Jose as co-administrator. Respondent Judge Tan disapproved the notice of appeal on
the ground that appointment of Jose was interlocutory and was not appealable. Hence, this petition for
mandamus to compel the judge to approve the record on appeal

ISSUE:

Whether or not the record on appeal was proper?

RULING: YES

RATIONALE: The circumstances obtaining in this case, that petitioner Francisco de Borja though originally
designated administrator, is and has for several years been one only in name due to his physical and mental
disability, as a result of which respondent Jose de Borja is now practically the sole administrator there is no
question that for all practical and legal purposes the appointment of Jose de Borja as co-administrator is
equivalent to and has the same effect as a sole regular or general administrator.

DISPOSITION: In view of the foregoing, holding that the appointment of a c-administrator, especially in the
present case, is appealable, the petition for mandamus is granted and respondent judge hereby directed to
approve the record on appeal and to give due course to the appeal