MAGDALENA COBARRUBIAS vs Arsenio Dizon

Facts:

The petitioner Magdalena Cobarrubias filed an urgent motion, alleging that the funeral
Pilar Leyba had deposited sys alhajas Are worth P4,500 in security section of the Bank
of the Philippine Islands; That said bank notified all interested parties that they withdraw
the contents of their section within the shortest possible time, so she asked to be
appointed special administrator and that she was authorized to withdraw said jewelry
from the bank. In her application Magdalena Cobarrubias stated that she was the only
forced heiress of the late Pilar Leyba. Accepting as good these allegations, the
Honorable Judge Dizon on the same date, July 5, 1945, appointed Magdalena
Cobarrubias special administrator on bail of P200. On July 19, the petitioner filed a brief
alleging that since the Court "has rescinded its order dated 5 of said month and year,"
requested that the Court order the cancellation of the bond of P200 and its return to the
lawyer of The applicant

Issue: Whether or not appointed special administrator can be revoked?

Held:

Yes.

Revoking the appointment of the appellant as special administrator and revoking the
order authorizing her to withdraw the deposited jewels, the Court does not abuse its
discretion, nor work outside its jurisdiction. The power of the Court of First Instance to
render ineffective the appointment of an administrator, when the appointment has been
obtained through false or incorrect representations, is indisputable. When the Court
appointed the appellant special administrator with authorization to withdraw from the
bank jewels valued at P4,500 under a P200 bond, it took into account its essential claim
that "it was the sole forced heiress of the deceased." There was no danger of possible
embezzlement; They could even name it without bail. But upon receiving a report that
this allegation was inaccurate. Which was confirmed by the motion of the same
petitioner who requested the "suspension of publication and postponement of the
hearing" because he wished to "have time to arrange an extrajudicial partition with his
co-heirs," the court had ample grounds to revoke those orders even Without notification
to the administrator: the intestate is not initiated for the benefit of the administrators but
of the heirs. The court should act immediately and not put in danger. With his
indifference, the jewels. If he allowed a few hours to pass, without taking drastic action,
the jewels valued at P4,500 could be withdrawn by the special administrator who was
only secured in P200 to the detriment of the interests of the minors. The zeal shown by
the court was well founded. The position of special administrator is one of trust. As soon
as it lost its confidence in the integrity of the applicant, the Court was fully justified in
revoking its appointment as special administrator and withdrawing its authorization to
remove the jewels from the bank.