#6 Municipality of Magallon et al vs.Bezore, GR The initial proceedings were in the nature of # L-14157, Oct. 20, 1960 escheat proceedings and NOT for the settlement of the estate of deceased persons. Since the CFI Spec Pro Doctrine: A court that has acquired its acquired jurisdiction by way of the publication of jurisdiction by virtue of a publication of the petition the petition for escheat, it CANNOT be converted for escheat CANNOT be converted into one for the into one for the distribution of the properties of the distribution of the properties of the decedents. said decedents. For such proceedings to be FACTS: The Municipalities of Magallon, et. al. instituted, the proper parties must be presented and instituted estate proceedings in the CFI of Negros the proceedings should comply with the Occidental for the estates of the deceased Anne requirements of the necessary rule. Fallon Murphy, Thomas Fallon (married to Julia HENCE, the CFI did not have any power to Fallon) of their various real properties (agricultural order, or to proceed with the distribution of the & residential) as well as rental deposits with WBC estates of the decedents in these escheat Ltd. for the benefit of said municipalities. The CFI proceedings, and adjudicate the properties to the judge found the petition to be in order and ordered oppositors. the publication for escheat proceedings and the hearing to be set. #7 Divino vs. Hilario, GR # L-44658, January 24, 1936 The petition for escheat was instituted since the municipalities believed that Anne, Thomas, and Spec Pro Doctrine: A court cannot acquire Julia had died without heirs. They all died in jurisdiction over escheat proceedings if the notice California on different dates. of publication requirement under the rules are not followed. It also follows that such court cannot An opposition to the escheat proceedings grant any remedy under the rules if it did not take was filed by Ignatius Bezore et. al. He claims that cognizance over the escheat proceedings. he is a nephew of the decedents because his mother was their sister. Others also claimed to be legatees FACTS: In the CFI of Davao, Tan Kui Sing (TKS) of Anne and other relatives in the case at bar. All began intestate proceedings for the deceased Tan oppositors are praying that the petition for escheat Chay (TC). Part of TKS’s petition said that TC was be dismissed and that the properties of the decedent party to a civil case pending appeal to this court, be distributed among them. and while the properties were still being determined, a special admin. be appointed to duly The CFI, after uncovering that Thomas died represent the deceased in the appeal. CFI then with an heir (his wife) and Anne died leaving a will appointed Ang Liongto (AL) as SA. AL made an (in which she disposed of all her properties), denied inventory and found out that he had left P5k in cash the petition for escheat proceedings of the in the possession of Philippine Foreign Trading & municipalities. However, the prayers of the Company (PFTC) and P390 as rents of a house. opppositors were denied since the evidence they Eventually, the CFI ordered the petition of TKS be submitted was insufficient to sustain their claims. set for trial and ordered that the notice of trial be As a response, the oppositors appealed said published in the newspaper El Magindanaw once decision. per week for three consecutive weeks. The notice ISSUE: Whether or not the CFI judge had authority WAS NOT PUBLISHED. to settle the estate of the deceased parties in favor of Since the notice was not published, no one the oppositors. appeared during the hearing and the CFI eventually HELD: NO. declared that TC died without any legal heirs. The P5k sum was acquired by the municipal president of if within the Philippine Islands. situated in the City estate. ED’s legal basis was person entitled to such estate. all surnamed to make inquisition. 1944. on behalf of returned by the municipality of Guianga and be the municipality. province of which the deceased was last an inhabitant. September 29. The of the facts and request set forth in the vendor remained in possession of the property under petition. and Narciso. the president and remedy afforded by Section 752 since the CFI did municipal council of the municipality where not effectively take cognizance of the escheat case the deceased last resided. the intestate without heirs. Nevertheless. together circulation in the province in which he had with the house erected thereon. would obtain the approval of the Japanese . to declare the minors subsequently appearing. Procedure when persons dies newspaper of general circulation did not occur. seized of real or personal by it is also logical that the CFI cannot grant the law entitled to the same. The notice shall recite the substance of Manila. if he was an because of the fatal flaw of not having the inhabitant of these Islands. the estate. the SC granted municipality in which he had estate. the court shall thereupon appoint a time and place of #8 Dionisio Rellosa vs. 750. and shall be published at Alleging that the sale was executed subject least six weeks successively. after estate of the deceased TC. dies intestate. husband. cause 1411. or of the publication happen. and deciding on such petition. heir. for the sum of P25. or if sold. applicable to case. the time and place at which persons a contract of lease entered into on the same date claiming the estate may appear and be heard between the same parties. — When a person CFI then did not acquire any jurisdiction. before the court.000. Emilia Divino (ED). Philippines. or other equal share the sum of P5k. in some newspaper of general sold to Gaw Chee Hun a parcel of land. he shall have possession ISSUE: Whether or not the CFI acquired of the same. and to adjudicate to them by legatee. the only heirs of TC. 1953 a notice thereof to be published in some Spec Pro Doctrine: Escheat proceedings may be newspaper of general circulation in the used to recover a land illegally owned by an alien. being a Chinese which publications shall be at least six citizen. GR # L- hearing. guardian of weeks before the time appointed by the court Bienvenido. it shall be forever Sections 750 and 752 of the Code of Civil barred. appears and files a claim with the court to such estate. Esperanze. if he the petition and resolved that the sum of P5k be resided out of the Islands. Dionisio Rellosa and if not. Loo Tan y Divino. may. widow. and so forth the municipality of Guianga. the municipality shall jurisdiction over the escheat proceedings over the be accountable to him for the avails. deducting reasonable charges for the care of HELD: NO. — If a devise. However. file a petition with the deposited with the clerk of court for distribution Court of First Instance of the province for an among the legal heirs of the deceased TC. but if a claim is not made within the time mentioned. 752. provide as follows: Since the notice of publication in a SEC. Right of heir. FACTS: On February 2. decree. inquisition in the premises. within Section 752 of the Code of Civil Procedure in which seventeen years from the date of such the minors could avail. the last of to the condition that the vendee. Gaw Chee Hun. appeared in the case and filed a motion to set aside the decree escheating the P5k to SEC.Guianga. Procedure. she being the payee. even if said requirement were met. HELD: NO. which prohibits transfers of private cancelling or negotiating it. filed with the following either of these remedies. Hi-Tri Development. GR # 192413. and. took out on October 28. and that. Act (sections 122. a Manager’s (2) escheat to the state. In effect. Millan was also agricultural lands to aliens. we can enforce the fundamental policy of our Constitution On April 30. 2012 would at all events be void under article XIII. It also held that the sale in question escheat proceedings will fail as shown in the case at is null and void. of our Constitution. 2003. whereas an action for informed that the Manager’s Check was available reversion is expressly authorized by the Public Land for her withdrawal. Check from RCBC-Ermita in the amount of P1M An action for reversion is slightly different (same as the downpayment amount) payable to from escheat proceeding. On December 14. Due to some obstacles. 123. through their company Hi-Tri. #9 RCBC vs. 6 issued on April 2. country. Spouses Bakunawa settled amicably their dispute with Millan. Millan refused to receive said amount. or by approving RTC the action for Escheat. it is shown substantially that the depositors have The SC applied the In Pari Delicto rule in not given up their rights over said deposit. proceedings may be instituted as a consequence of a The Spouses Bakunawa retained custody of violation of article XIII. section 5. and 124 of Commonwealth Act No. 141). but plaintiff is barred from taking bar. authorities. and it may be the Court of First Instance of Manila seeking the subjected to escheat proceedings by the Republic. 1943.Military Administration in accordance with (seirei) regarding our natural resources without doing No. through the OSG. Escheat their basis for a complaint against Millan. the Republic. but in its effects they are Millan’s company Rosmil and used this as one of the same. the spouses rescinded the sale There are at present two ways by which this and offered to return to Millan her downpayment. with the spouses giving Millan the Owner’s precedent of allowing an alien in owning land in our Copies of TCTs of said lots. the present action under the Pari Delicto principle. By 2006. by the Japanese violence to the principle of pari delicto. (1) action for reversion. Spec Pro Doctrine: A bank has a responsibility to inform its depositors that a deposit has been The vendor instituted the present action in inactive for more than 10 years. On January. 31. FACTS: Millan paid the spouses Bakunawa a little ISSUE: Whether or not the SC decision of leaving above P1M as downpayment for the purchase of six both parties in pari delicto creates a dangerous (6) lots. the sale June 13. and said approval has not been obtained. an implementary law as above suggested. the the case at bar. section 5 of our RCBC’s Manager’s Check and refrained from Constitution. conclusion the mandate of our Constitution. 1991. without the There are two ways now open to our knowledge of Spouses Bakunawa. to wit: However. 2008. If annulment of the sale. situation may be remedied. the spouses. the sale did not push through. The . RCBC reported government whereby it could implement the the “P1M – credit existing in favor of Rosmil to the doctrine of this Court in the Krivenko case thereby Bureau of Treasury as among its ‘unclaimed putting in force and carrying to its logical balances’” as of the said date. Consequently. They only differ in procedure. As the records that would show that the OSG appealed the Manager’s Check neither went to the hands of assailed CA judgments. should be excluded from the amount to be paid for the check would be sourced escheat proceedings. We further note that there is nothing in the instrument instead of cancelling it. and that it may be subjected to escheat pronouncing that the RTC Clerk of Court failed to proceedings if left unclaimed. escheat proceedings in favor of the Republic. August 30. rendering the instrument incomplete. presentment of the check to the bank for payment did not occur. As a result. Petitioner does not dispute the fact that respondents retained custody of the instrument. In fact.Spouses tried to recover the P1M under Manager’s An order to debit the account of respondents was Check but they were informed that the amount was never made. is undisputed that there was no effective delivery of the check. and that the Manager’s Check. As it is obvious HELD: NO. we rule Petitioner acknowledges that the Manager’s that the allocated deposit. issue individual notices directed to all persons claiming interest in the unclaimed balances. as they a manager’s check automatically passes to the payee were not informed of the ongoing escheat is inapplicable. we find that it is no longer necessary to remand the case for hearing to determine whether the claim of respondents was valid. Spec Pro Doctrine: . years. We reiterate our from the deposit account of Hi-Tri. 1988 Since there was no delivery. accepted in advance – remains undelivered. because the instrument – although proceedings. The RTC ordered the deposit of the the assigned fund is deemed to remain part of the escheated balances with the Treasurer and credited account of Hi-Tri. Respondents claim that Check. The CA also held that the decision and order of the RTC were void for want of jurisdiction. When Rosmil pronouncement that the objective of escheat did not accept the Manager’s Check offered by proceedings is state forfeiture of unclaimed respondents. In addition. subject of the Check was procured by respondents. we have already settled that respondents retained ownership of the funds. We take this failure to Rosmil nor was it further negotiated to other appeal as an indication of disinterest in pursuing the persons. The doctrine that the deposit represented by they were not able to participate in the trial. It escheated in favor of the Republic. petitioner confirms that the already subject of the escheat proceedings before Manager’s Check was never negotiated or presented the RTC. from their foregoing actions that they have not abandoned their claim over the fund. and that the allocated fund is still held by the bank. for payment to its Ermita Branch. which procured the Manager’s in favor of the Republic. GR # L-30381. CFI of Manila. There was no contention that ISSUE: Whether or not the allocated funds may be they were the procurers of the Manager’s Check. Hence. but was subsequently denied. #10 Republic of the PH vs. the instrument remained undelivered. After a careful review of the RTC records. the latter retained custody of the balances. A motion for reconsideration was filed. respondents should have been informed that the deposit had been left inactive for more than 10 The CA reversed the RTC ruling. actions in the name of the People of the Philippines in the Court of First Instance of the province where FACTS: Pursuant to Unclaimed Balance Law (ACT the bank is located. the Treasurer of the suit. It is in this sense that it The lower court decided in favor of respondent. (2) Whether or not Section 2(b). The escheat of the dormant deposits in favor of the Republic then instituted before the CFI of Manila a government would necessarily deprive said bank of complaint for escheat against private respondent. or who have not been heard from. Treasurer of the Philippines separate statements All or any member of such creditors or depositors or under oath by their respective managing officers of banks." ISSUES: and it is for this reason that Section 3 of Act No. governs As to the second issue. is located. Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court on venue. party in interest in the escheat proceedings. may be included in one action. all deposits and credits held by them in favor. Escheat HELD: (1) YES (2) NO proceedings are actions in rem which must be The SC denied the petition and stated that Section 3 brought in the province or city where the rem in this of Act No. the use of such deposits. 3936 provides that Whenever the case the dormant deposits. private respondent forwarded to the parties the bank and such creditors or depositors. Roxas Rural Bank is a real joined as a party in the action for escheat. likewise. he shall commence an action or . or who A "real party in interest" has been defined as the have not made further deposits or withdrawals party who would be benefitted or injured by the during the preceding ten years or more. govern escheat proceedings principally because said section refers to personal actions. 3936 specifically provides that the bank shall be (1) Whether or not Pres. suffice it to say that Section escheat proceedings instituted by the Republic in 2(b) of Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court cannot the Court of First Instance of Manila. Attorney General shall be informed of such unclaimed balances. There can be no doubt that private the Philippines caused the same to be published in respondent bank falls under this definition for the two newspapers of general circulation. in which shall be joined as No. or in the names of such depositors or creditors known to be dead. 3936). stands to be "injured by the judgment of the suit. Upon judgment of the suit or the party entitled to avail of receipt of these sworn statements.