SUCCESSION CASE RICARDO C. SILVERIO, SR., vs. RICARDO S. SILVERIO, JR., CITRINE HOLDINGS, INC., MONICA P. OCAMPO and ZEE2 RESOURCES, INC. G.R. Nos. Nos. 208828-2 A!"!s# $%, 20$& 'ACTS: 'ACTS: The late Beatriz Beatriz S. Silverio Silverio died without without leaving a will, will, survived survived by her legal heirs, heirs, namely: namely: Ricardo C. Silverio, Sr. (husband), dmundo S. Silverio (son), dgardo S. Silverio (son), Ricardo S. Silverio, !r. (son), "elia S.Silverio#$ee S.Silverio#$ee (daughter), (daughter), and %igaya S. Silverio (daughter). (daughter). Subse&uently, Subse&uently, an intestate intestate 'roceeding or the settlement o her estate was iled by Silverio, Sr. The administrator irst a''ointed by the Court was $*R$+ $*R$+ S%-R+ S%-R+ ($*R$+ ($*R$+), ), but by virtue virtue o a !oint /aniestat /aniestation ion dated 0 "ovember 1222 iled by the heirs o B*TR3 B*TR3 $. S%-R+, S%-R+, the motion to withdraw as administrator iled by $*R$+ was a''roved by the intestate court and in his stead, Silverio, Sr. was a''ointed as the new admini administr strato ator. r. Thereat Thereater er,, an activ active e e4chang e4change e o 'leadi 'leadings ngs to remove remove and a''oin a''ointt a new administrator ensued between Silverio, Sr. and Silverio, !r. The intestate court li'#lo''ed in a''ointing as administrator o the estate 'etitioner and res'ondent Silverio, !r. n an +rder in 5667, Silverio, Sr. was removed as administrator and in his stead, S%-R+, !R. was designated as the new administrator. By virtue o the aoresaid +rder, Silverio, Silverio, !r. on 18 +ctober 5669 e4ecuted a $eed o *bsolute Sale in avor o CTR" +%$"S, nc. (CTR") over the 'ro'erty located /a;ati City. CTR" became the registered owner thereo. * $eed o *bsolute Sale was li;ewise e4ecuted in avor o /onica <. +cam'o, subse&uently sold to 35 Resources, nc. (35). Silverio, Sr.iled an =rgent *''lication or the ssuance o TR+ restraining and>or 'reventing Silverio, !r., /onica, CTR", and their successors#in#interest rom committing any act that would aect the titles to the three 'ro'erties. *n +mnibus +rder was issued by the intestate court acting u'on 'ending motions iled by 'etitioner and res'ondent Silverio, !r., ather and son, res'ectively, who are the central igures in the now decade#old controversy over the ntestate state o the late Beatriz S. Silverio. +n ?ebruary 5611, S%-R+ SR. iled an =rgent +mnibus /otion (a) To $eclare as "ull and -oid the $eed o *bsolute Sale dated 18 Se'tember 5616@ (b) To cancel the Transer Certiicate o Title "o. 668# 5611666676@ and (c) To reinstate the Transer Certiicate o Title "o. 5508151 in the name o Ricardo C. SilverioSr. and the ntestate state o the late Beatriz S. Silverio. The intestate court rendered the now assailed assailed +rders +rders granting granting the 'relimina 'reliminary ry inAunctio inAunction n against against Silverio Silverio,, !r., !r., and declaring declaring the $eed o *bsolute Sale, TCT and and all derivative derivative titles over the the Cambridge and ntsia ntsia 'ro'erties as null and void. The Court o *''eals rendered decision declaring the $eed o *bsolute Sale, Transer Certiicate o Title and all derivative titles over the Cambridge and ntsia
The C* thereore did not err in reversing the *ugust 1D, 5611 +rder o the intestate court annulling the sale o the subAect 'ro'erties grounded solely on the inAunction issued in C*#.R. S< "o. 29128. Res'ondents +cam'o, Citrine and 35 should not be 'reAudiced by the li'#lo''ing a''ointment o *dministrator by the intestate court, having relied in good aith that the sale was authorized and with 'rior a''roval o the intestate court under its +mnibus +rder dated +ctober 01, 5668 which remained valid and subsisting insoar as it allowed the aoresaid sale. S+ +R$R$.
SUCCESSION( )*+n an In#+s#a#+ Es#a#+ + a/d/1 so/d 1 #*+ adns#3a#o3.
4UESTION5 The late Beatriz S. Silverio died without leaving a will, survived by her legal heirs, namely: Ricardo C. Silverio, Sr. (husband), dmundo S. Silverio (son), dgardo S. Silverio (son), Ricardo S. Silverio, !r. (son), "elia S.Silverio#$ee (daughter), and %igaya S. Silverio (daughter). Subse&uently, an intestate 'roceeding or the settlement o her estate was iled by Silverio, Sr. The administrator irst a''ointed by the Court was $*R$+ S%-R+ ($*R$+), but by virtue o a !oint /aniestation dated 0 "ovember 1222 iled by the heirs o B*TR3 $. S%-R+, the motion to withdraw as administrator iled by $*R$+ was a''roved by the intestate court and in his stead, Silverio, Sr. was a''ointed as the new administrator. Thereater, an active e4change o 'leadings to remove and a''oint a new administrator ensued between Silverio, Sr. and Silverio, !r. The intestate court li'#lo''ed in a''ointing as administrator o the estate 'etitioner and res'ondent Silverio, !r. Silverio, Sr. iled an =rgent +mnibus /otion to declare the $eed o *bsolute Sale, Transer Certiicate o Title and all derivative titles over the Cambridge and ntsia
ANS)ER5 es, the sale o the ntestate state o the late Beatriz S. Silverio was valid. *n administrator can validly sell the intestate estate under his administration +"% by leave o court. hile it is true that Silverio Sr. was eventually reinstated as *dministrator 'ursuant to the 566D decision, the 'ermanent inAunction issued by the C*, as e4'licitly stated in its allo, 'ertained only to the 'ortions o the 5668 +mnibus +rder u'holding the grant o letters o administration to and ta;ing o an oath o administration by Silverio, !r., as otherwise the C* would have e4'ressly set aside as well the directive in the same +mnibus +rder allowing the sale o the subAect 'ro'erties. The Res'ondents +cam'o, Citrine and 35 should not be 'reAudiced by the li'#lo''ing a''ointment o *dministrator by the intestate court, having relied in good aith that the sale was authorized and with 'rior a''roval o the intestate court under its +mnibus +rder in 5668 which remained valid and subsisting insoar as it allowed the aoresaid sale.
