CASE DIGEST: Go Ong v. CA (G.R. No. 75884)

CASE DIGEST: [238 Phil. 259] SECOND DIVISION [ G.R. No. 75884, September 24, 1987 ] JULITA GO ONG, FOR HERSELF AND AS JUDICIAL GUARDIAN OF STEVEN GO ONG, PETITIONERS, VS. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION AND THE CITY SHERIFF OF QUEZON CITY, RESPONDENTS. PARAS, J.:

FACTS: Two parcels of land (Lots 1 and 12) were in the name of “Alfredo Ong Bio Hong married to Julita Go Ong.” When Alfredo died, Julita was appointed Administratrix. Julita sold Lot 12 to Lim Che Boon and mortgaged Lot 1 to Allied Bank to secure a loan of P900,000. When the Bank tried to collect the unpaid amount of P828,000 on the loan, Julita filed a complaint alleging that the contract of mortgage she entered into with the Bank was a nullity because the necessary judicial approval was never obtained. Julita based her allegation on Sec. 7, Rule 89 of the Rules of Court whereby a judicial approval is mandatory before an administrator can validly enter into a mortgage over properties belonging to the estate.

ISSUE: Is judicial approval necessary to validate the mortgage entered into by the Administratrix?

HELD: Julita’s assertion that the mortgage is void for want of judicial approval required under Section 7 of Rule 89 of the Rules of Court may have merit insofar as the rest of the estate of her husband is concerned but the same is not true as regards her conjugal share and her hereditary rights in the estate. Section 7 of Rule 89 is not applicable since the mortgage was constituted in her personal capacity and not in her capacity as Administratrix of the estate of her husband. The fact that what had been mortgaged was in custodial legis is immaterial, insofar as her conjugal share and hereditary share in the property is concerned since she was the absolute owner thereof.

Popular Posts