PROBATE OF A WILL:

     The Supreme Court, without unnecessarily ascertaining whether the obligation involved—the production of the original holographic will—is in the nature of a public or a private duty, ruled that the remedy of mandamus cannot be availed of by respondent because there lies another plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Let it be noted that respondent has a photocopy of the will and that he seeks the production of the original for purposes of probate. The Rules of Court, however, does not prevent him from instituting probate proceedings for the allowance of the will whether the same is in his possession or not under Sections 1 to 5, Rule 76 of the Rules of Court. x x x x Indeed, the grant of the writ of mandamus lies in the sound discretion of the court. There being a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the production of the subject will, the remedy of mandamus cannot be availed of (UY LIAO ENG vs. NIXON LEE, G.R. No. 176831, January 15, 2010, Third Division, Nachura).