Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1969 > July 1969 Decisions > G.R. No. L-23159 July 28, 1969 - BENIGNO T. PEREZ, ET AL. v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-23159. July 28, 1969.]

TRUSTEESHIP OF BENIGNO, ANTONIO and ANGELA, all surnamed PEREZ Y TUASON, ANTONIO M. PEREZ, judicial guardian-appellant, v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA, trustee-appellee.

[G.R. No. L-23160. July 28, 1969.]

TRUSTEESHIP OF THE MINORS BENIGNO, ANGELA and ANTONIO, all surnamed PEREZ Y TUASON, ANTONIO M. PEREZ, judicial guardian-appellant, v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA, trustee-appellee.

[G.R. No. L-23161. July 28, 1969.]

TRUSTEESHIP OF BENIGNO, ANTONIO and ANGELA, all surnamed PEREZ Y TUASON, ANTONIO M. PEREZ, judicial guardian-appellant, v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA, trustee-appellee.

[G.R. No. L-24297. July 28, 1969.]

TRUSTEESHIP OF THE MINORS BENIGNO PEREZ Y TUASON, ET AL., ANTONIO PEREZ Y TUASON, ET AL., beneficiaries-appellants, v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA, trustee-appellee.

Alfonso Felix, Jr, and A. Perez for judicial guardian-appellant.

Araneta & Araneta for trutee-appellee.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; APPEAL; DISMISSAL; ISSUE HAS BECOME MOOT; TRUST SUBJECT OF APPEAL HAS TERMINATED AND ESTATE IN TRUST DISTRIBUTED TO BENEFICIARIES. — Where the appeal involves a trust which was ordered terminated by the lower court and the project of partition of the estate involved therein approved upon joint manifestation of the trustee and the 3-named beneficiaries have confirmed and ratified the trustee’s right to his fees, the ruling on the question as to what expenses should be charged to the principal of the trust or to its income has become moot, said beneficiaries now being entitled to the principal and income of the said trust. The appeal should therefore be dismissed.


R E S O L U T I O N


SANCHEZ, J.:


The four (4) cases above numbered are before this Court upon a joint motion to dismiss filed in each of the said cases, which motions to dismiss are written in the same language, one a verbatim reproduction of the others except as hereinafter noted. A sample of the joint motion to dismiss as set forth in L-23159 reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS

COME NOW, J. Antonio Araneta, the trustee-appellee in the above- entitled case, and the undersigned Benigno dela Vega, Angela T. Staley (nee Angela Perez y Tuason), and Antonio Perez y Tuason, assisted by their respective counsels and to this Honorable Court respectfully allege:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. That this appeal from an order of the trusteeship court in Special Proceeding No. Q-73 involves a trust which was created by the late Angela S. Tuason for the benefit of the children of her daughter, Angela I. Tuason, and which was administered by J. Antonio Araneta as trustee in trusteeship proceeding No. Q-73 of the lower court.

2. That the undersigned Benigno de la Vega is Angela I. Tuason’s son by the late Benigno de la Vega Inclan, but was also known as ‘Benigno Perez y Tuason’ because he was adopted by Antonio M. Perez the present husband of Angela I. Tuason; Angela T. Staley (nee Angela Perez y Tuason) and Antonio Perez y Tuason are the children of Angela I. Tuason by Antonio M. Perez; and that Benigno de la Vega (Benigno Perez y Tuason), Angela T. Staley (nee Angela Perez y Tuason) and Antonio Perez y Tuason are all the beneficiaries of the trust administered by the trustee-appellee in Special Proceeding No. Q-73 in the lower court.

3. That the judicial guardian-appellant, Antonio M. Perez, is a party to trusteeship proceedings No. Q-73 and prosecuted this appeal and other appeals from orders of the lower court in said proceeding only in his capacity as the judicial guardian and in behalf of the of aforesaid three beneficiaries who were then his wards on account of their minority.

4. That the guardianship over the three aforenamed beneficiaries terminated when they became of legal age.

5. That Benigno de la Vega (Benigno Perez y Tuason) became of age on February 3, 1960, Angela T. Staley on March 21, 1965 and Antonio Perez Y Tuason, the youngest, on April 17, 1969.

6. That under the terms of the trust herein involved, the trust would terminate when all of the beneficiaries become of legal age and a majority of them should decide to terminate it, in which case, the entire trust estate should be distributed equally among all the beneficiaries; and that all the said three beneficiaries as well as the trustee-appellee decided and agreed, after the youngest beneficiary, Antonio Perez y Tuason, had reached the age of 21 on April 17, 1969, to terminate the trust on April 30, 1969.

7. That the trustee-appellee and all the forenamed three beneficiaries of the trust, assisted by their respective counsels, thereafter filed with the lower court in the trusteeship proceeding a ‘Joint Manifestation and Motion for Approval of Project of Partition’, dated April 18, 1969, praying for an order declaring that the trust would terminate on April 30, 1969, approving the project of partition of the trust estate therein embodied, and authorizing the trustee-appellee to convey all the assets of the trust estate to the above-named three beneficiaries in accordance with said project of partition. A xerox copy of said ‘Joint Manifestation and Motion for Approval of Project of Partition’ is hereto attached as Appendix ‘A’, and the corresponding Order (xerox copy) of the lower court, dated April 19, 1969 granting it is hereto attached as Appendix ‘B’.

8. That as this Honorable Court will note, all the three beneficiaries already manifested in the said joint manifestation and motion (Appendix ‘A’) that they confirmed and ratified all the quarterly accounts of the trustee-appellee which had been filed prior to the date of said motion (See paragraphs 5 and 12 of Appendix ‘A’), and that ‘for expediency and practical reasons . . . all motions, petitions and incidents which may still be pending resolution in this proceeding, and all appeals and special civil actions pending in the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals relating to or affecting this trust be considered abandoned and withdrawn’ (See paragraph 4 of Appendix ‘A’).

9. That the three beneficiaries herein confirm and ratify the trustee-appellee’s right to the trustee’s fees involved in this appeal.

10. That all the undersigned parties have no further desire to prosecute this appeal.

11. That since the undersigned are all the real parties in interest in the above-entitled case, it is submitted that in view of the foregoing, this case has become academic and should be dismissed.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the above-entitled case be dismissed.

Manila, MAY 30, 1969.

(SGD.) J. ANTONIO ARANETA

Trustee

(SGD.) ANGELA T. STALEY

Beneficiary

(SGD.) BENIGNO DE LA VEGA

Beneficiary

(SGD.) ANTONIO PEREZ Y TUASON

Beneficiary

Assisted By:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

ARANETA, MENDOZA & PAPA

By

(SGD.) J. ANTONIO ARANETA

Counsel for Trustee

4th Floor, A & T Building

Escolta, Manila

(SGD.) ANTONIO PISON, JR. (SGD.) LEONARDO ABOLA

Counsel for Angela T. Staley Counsel for Benigno de la Vega

UPL Building and Antonio Perez y Tuason

Port Area, Manila 3rd Floor, Avenue Building

Rizal Avenue, Manila

V e r i f i c a t i o n

WE, the undersigned, after being duly sworn, depose and declare:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

That we have read the foregoing motion and that the allegations thereof are true and correct as of our own knowledge.

(SGD.) ANGELA T. STALEY (SGD.) J. ANTONIO ARANETA (SGD.) BENIGNO DE LA VEGA(SGD.) ANTONIO PEREZ

Y TUASON

J u r a t

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE me on this 30th day of May, 1969 at Manila affiants exhibiting to me the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Name Res. Cert. No. Date and Place

J. Antonio Araneta A-182901 Jan. 10, 1969 — Manila

Angela T. Staley A-157243 Feb. 27, 1969 — Manila

Benigno de la Vega A-3417506 Jan. 31, 1969 — Sagada,

Mt. Prov.

Antonio Perez y Tuason A-5879287 May 19, 1969 — Manila

(SGD.) RODOLFO D. MAPILE

NOTARY PUBLIC

Until December 31, 1970

Doc. No. 314

Page No. 64

Book No. II

Series of 1969."cralaw virtua1aw library

The sole difference between the averments in the joint motion to dismiss in L-23159 and L-23160 is in the averment of paragraph 9 in the last mentioned case, which reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"9. That this appeal was made solely to seek a ruling on what expenses should be charged to principal of the trust or to its income, a question that will serve no purpose now because the undersigned beneficiaries of the trust, in whose behalf this appeal was made, are now entitled both to the principal and income of the trust."cralaw virtua1aw library

In L-23161 and in L-24297, the allegations noted in paragraph 9 of the joint motion to dismiss in L-23159 and L-23160 are omitted. Instead, paragraphs 10 and 11 in L-23159 and L-23160 were reproduced in L-23161 and L-24297 as paragraphs 9 and 10.

It thus appearing that the above-entitled cases have all become moot and academic, the Court resolved to dismiss all of the said cases, without costs. So ordered.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Makalintal, Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Capistrano, Teehankee and Barredo, JJ., concur.

Dizon, J., took no part.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






July-1969 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-27758 July 14, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEMETRIO NABUAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20194 July 17, 1969 - IN RE: JAMES UY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-24764 July 17, 1969 - EUFROSINO ROM v. CLEMENTE COBADORA

  • G.R. No. L-28355 July 17, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. APOLINARIO LUMANTAS

  • G.R. No. L-29839 July 17, 1969 - TOMAS SABANGAN v. MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29369 July 24, 1969 - CESAR R. BORROMEO v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26337 July 25, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SATURNINO MABAGA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28884 July 25, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOLY SIA

  • G.R. No. L-20354 July 28, 1969 - GERARDO SAMSON, JR. v. FELIPE TARROZA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21024 July 28, 1969 - CENON MATEO v. FLORENCIO MORENO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23159 July 28, 1969 - BENIGNO T. PEREZ, ET AL. v. J. ANTONIO ARANETA

  • G.R. No. L-25137 July 28, 1969 - J. P. JUAN & SONS, INC. v. LIANGA INDUSTRIES, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-25882 July 28, 1969 - CESAR T. ROSALES, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27569 July 28, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO PASCUAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27792 July 28, 1969 - ANTONIO NARITO v. JOSE CARRIDO

  • G.R. No. L-29051 July 28, 1969 - BINGING HO v. MUNICIPAL BOARD OF CANVASSERS OF BONGAO, SULU, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30734 July 28, 1969 - JUAN DIOSAMITO, ET AL. v. BENJAMIN BALANQUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22764 July 28, 1969 - CALTEX (PHILIPPINES), INC. v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22702 July 28, 1969 - VICENTE A. GOMEZ v. CENTRAL VEGETABLE OIL MANUFACTURING COMPANY

  • G.R. No. L-30364 July 28, 1969 - ANGEL C. BAKING, ET AL. v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

  • G.R. No. L-25299 July 29, 1969 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. ITOGON-SUYOC MINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22986 July 29, 1969 - MANILA PORT SERVICE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25274 July 29, 1969 - NORTHWEST ORIENT AIRLINES, INC. v. LOUISE MATEU, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27348 July 29, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MIGUEL MENDEZ, ET, AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30570 July 29, 1969 - JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, ET AL. v. BRAULIO STO. DOMINGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29002 July 30, 1969 - EDUARDO VIDAL, ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28095 July 30, 1969 - ANTONIO DE LA CRUZ, ET AL. v. PERFECTO BURGOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27117 July 30, 1969 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28022 July 30, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO LABA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25814 July 30, 1969 - CEZAR LUCHAYCO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-26860 July 30, 1969 - ALBERTA B. CABRAL, ET AL. v. TEODORA EVANGELISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28214 July 30, 1969 - NATIVIDAD V. A. JARODA v. VICENTE N. CUSI, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19753 July 30, 1969 - ANGELA LAZATIN v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20723 July 30, 1969 - WASHINGTON P. PONCE v. EUGENIO E. VAÑO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21887 July 30, 1969 - IN RE: TEOTIMO T. TOMADA, ET AL. v. RODOLFO T. TOMADA

  • G.R. No. L-23977 July 30, 1969 - MANILA TRADING & SUPPLY COMPANY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22607 July 30, 1969 - IN RE: REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. LEE WAI LAM

  • G.R. No. L-23683 July 30, 1969 - JUAN APURILLO v. HONORATO GARCIANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26737 July 31, 1969 - LAURA CORPUS, ET AL. v. FELARDO PAJE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-27790 July 31, 1969 - SOFRONIO ALCANTARA v. MARCELO VALDEHUEZA

  • G.R. No. L-26584 July 31, 1969 - MARA, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26741 July 31, 1969 - IN RE: TESSIE ASTERO v. CHIEF OF POLICE OF DAGUPAN CITY

  • G.R. Nos. L-27948 & L-28001-11 July 31, 1969 - LA PERLA CIGAR & CIGARETTE FACTORY, ET AL. v. ELEUTERIO CAPAPAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29278 July 31, 1969 - AGRICULTURAL CREDIT ADMIN. v. LASAM FARMERS’ COOPERATIVE MARKETING ASSOC., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30027 July 31, 1969 - JUSTINA C. SANTOS v. JESUS DE VEYRA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-23041 July 31, 1969 - E. RODRIGUEZ, INC. v. COLLECTOR INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-24458-64 July 31, 1966

    AMANDO ALGABRE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-24749 July 31, 1969 - GEORGE W. FLEISCHER, ET AL. v. PAMPLONA PLANTATION COMPANY INC.

  • G.R. No. L-25504 July 31, 1969 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO F. NER