Baluyot v. Panio* (1976) *Title as indicated in the original case is Baluyut v.

Pao Facts: Soltero Baluyut died on January 6, 1975 at the age of 86, leaving an estate valued at not less than Php2M. A few weeks later, his nephew Alfredo Baluyut filed before the CFI of Quezon City a verified petition for the issuance of letters of administration in his favor, alleging that Encarnacion Lopez Baluyut, Solteros widow, was mentally incapable of acting as administratrix of the decedents estate. Believing that Soltero executed a will, Alfredo prayed that he be appointed as special administrator in the meantime. The CFI granted Alfredos petition. Mrs. Baluyut filed an opposition to the appointment. She claimed that the allegation as to her mental incapacity was libelous, and that she was unaware that her husband executed a will. Finding that Mrs. Baluyut was mentally qualified, the CFI cancelled Alfredos appointment. However, upon filing of a motion for reconsideration, Alfredos appointment was again appointed as special administrator, together with Jose Espino, an acknowledged natural child of Soltero. Mrs. Baluyut again countered, arguing that Jose effectively rid Alfredo of any interest in the estate of Soltero by exclusion, he being a collateral relative. Alfredo naturally opposed, arguing that Jose was not a natural child of the decedent, at the same time insisting that Mrs. Baluyut was incapable of becoming an administratrix, as declared by another court in a separate guardianship proceeding. Based on the testimony of Mrs. Baluyut herself, the probate court terminated the appointment of Jose and Alfredo as adminstrators and ordered that the former be appointed as administratrix, due to her preferential right to be appointed as such. Letters of administration were issued in her favor after posting a Php20,000.00 bond. In appointing Mrs. Baluyut as administratrix, the court proceeded upon the assumption that as a collateral relative, Alfredo had no interest in the estate of Soltero. Aggrieved, Alfredo elevated the matter to the Supreme Court via a special civil action for certiorari. During the course of the proceedings, the alleged will of the decedent was apparently discovered and presented to the court. Although the decision did not dwell on the contents of the will and the manner through which it was discovered, the decision did mention that Alfredo was named a legatee therein, giving him standing to question the qualifications of the administratrix. Issues: 1. W/N the court erred in finding Mrs. Baluyut mentally capable of becoming an administratrix on the basis of her testimony 2. W/N the proceeding in the lower court must be converted into a testamentary proceeding after the alleged will has been presented Held/Ratio: 1. Yes. A hearing is necessary in order to determine the suitability of the person to be appointed administrator by giving him the opportunity to prove his qualifications and affording oppositors a chance to contest the petition. Whether Sotero Baluyut died testate or intestate, it is imperative in the interest of the orderly administration of justice that a hearing be held to determine Mrs. Baluyut's fitness to act as executrix or administratrix. Persons questioning her capacity should be given an adequate opportunity to be heard and to present evidence. 2. Yes. It is necessary to convert the proceeding in the lower court into a testamentary proceeding. The probate of the will cannot be dispensed with and is a matter of public policy. After the will is probated, the prior letters of administration should be revoked and proceedings for the issuance of letters testamentary or of administration under the will should be conducted.