Sale of Property Without approval from probate court is null and void

The evidence shows that when the questioned properties were sold without court approval by private respon¬dent to petitioner, the same were under administration. The subject properties therefore are under the jurisdic¬tion of the probate court which according to our settled jurisprudence has the authority to approve any dispo¬sition regarding properties under administration.
An administratrix of an estate already subject of a special proceeding pending before the probate court cannot enjoy blanket authority to dispose of real properties as she pleases. More emphatic is the declaration We made in Estate of Olave vs. Reyes (123 SCRA 767) wherein We stated that when the estate of the deceased person is already the subject of a testate or intestate proceeding, the administrator cannot enter into any transaction involving it without prior approval of the probate court.
Only recently, in Manotok Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals (149 SCRA 174), We held that the sale of an immovable property belonging to an estate of a decedent, in a special proceeding, needs court approval, thus:
"Although the Rules of Court do not specifically state that the sale of an immovable property belonging to an estate of a decedent, in a special proceeding, should be made with the approval of the court, this authority is necessarily included in its capacity as a probate court."
This pronouncement finds support in the previous case of Dolores Vda. de Gil vs. Agustin Cancio (14 SCRA 797) wherein We emphasized that it is within the jurisdiction of a probate court to approve the sale of properties of a deceased person by his prospective heirs before final adjudication. Consequently, it is error to say that this matter should be threshed out in a separate action.
It being settled that property under administration needs the approval of the probate court before it can be disposed of, any unauthorized disposition does not bind the estate and is null and void. As early as 1921 in the case of Godoy vs. Orellano (42 Phil. 347), We laid down the rule that a sale by an administrator of property of the deceased, which is not authorized by the probate court is null and void and title does not pass to the purchaser.
There is hardly any doubt that the probate court can declare null and void the disposition of the property under administration, made by private respondent, the same having been effected without authority from the said court. It is the probate court that has the power to authorize and/or approve the sale (Sections 4 and 7, Rule 89), hence, a fortiori, it is said court that can declare it null and void for as long as the proceed¬ings had not been closed or terminated. To uphold petitioner's contention that the probate court cannot annul the unauthorized sale, would render meaningless the power pertaining to the said court. Sales of properties under administration which do not comply with the requisites under sections 4 and 7 of Rule 89 are null and void (Bonaga vs. Soler, 2 SCRA 755).

THIRD DIVISION
[ G.R. No. 77660, July 28, 1988 ]
ELADIO DILLENA, PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND AURORA CARREON, RESPONDENTS.