AQUILINA LARGADO, PETITIONER AND APPELLEE VS. JUDGE LUPO A. MASAGANDA, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS. ANGELO DE LOS REYES, RESPONDENT AND APPELLANT.

On January 7, 1960, Angelo de los Reyes filed a petition before the
Justice of the Peace Court of Unisan, Quezon, praying that he be
appointed guardian of the persons and properties of certain minors.

The petition was given due course and was set for hearing on January
27, 1960. Aquilina Largado, mother of the minors, because of the
failure of her counsel to appear, was declared in default. Two hours
later, the counsel appeared and moved for the reconsideration of the
order of default, but the same was denied. Thereupon, the justice of
the peace court issued an order appointing Angelo de los Reyes guardian
as prayed for.

On February 6, 1960, Aquilina Largado filed a motion to dismiss on
the ground that said justice of the peace court has no jurisdiction to
appoint a guardian under Republic Act No. 2613, which was enacted on
August 1, 1959. This motion was also denied.

On February 17, 1960, Aquilina Largado filed a petition for
certiorari with preliminary injunction before the Court of First
Instance of Quezon praying for the nullification of the orders entered
by the Justice of the Peace Court of Unisan as above specified on the
ground of lack of jurisdiction reiterating the same reasons already
advanced in her motion to dismiss. And acting on it, the court a quo granted ex parte
the writ prayed for. In the meantime, respondents gave their answer
justifying the appointment made by the Justice of the Peace Court of
Unisan, and after issues were joined, the court a quo
rendered decision holding that the Justice of the Peace Court of Unisan
has no jurisdiction to appoint a guardian because the same is
prohibited by Republic Act No. 2613.

In due time, petitioner took the present appeal.

The issue posed before us is whether a justice of the peace court
has jurisdiction to appoint a guardian at the time the present petition
was filed before the Justice of the Peace Court of Unisan.^[1]

The court a quo answered the question in the negative
relying on Section 10 of Republic Act No. 2613, which was enacted on
August 1, 1959. Indeed, said section, which amends Section 88 of
Republic Act No. 296, known as the Judiciary Act of 1948, provides that
the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace courts shall not extend,
among others, to the appointment of guardians even if the Secretary of
Justice has ruled otherwise in an opinion rendered in 1959. In this
respect, we agree with the court a quo, since the provisions of said Act are clear.

The contention that the insertion of the term “guardian” in said
Section 10 was only due to an over-sight as opined by the Secretary of
Justice may have some basis, considering the intent of Congress in
approving Republic Act 2613; nevertheless, we are of the opinion that
the mistake cannot be corrected by executive fiat, but by legislation.
This is what Congress in effect did when on June 17, 1961 it approved
Republic Act No. 3090 rectifying the mistake committed (Section 5).
However, since said Act does not contain any saving clause, its
provisions cannot be given retroactive effect.

The foregoing discussion makes it unnecessary to dwell on the
background of the law relative to the jurisdiction of justice of the
peace courts on matters pertaining to the appointment of guardians.

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is affirmed, without costs.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Labrador, Concepcion, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.