Appeal taken by  Arminio, Oscar, Apolinario and Danilo, all surnamed Rivera, from the order of the Court of First Instance of Rizal dated January  9, 1960 in  Special Proceedings No. 1709 approving the Final Report of Accounts submitted by Remedios E. Espiritu as guardian of the estate of Marcosa Rivera.

On March 2,  1953,  appellee was appointed guardian  of the estate of the  above-named  incompetent.  The  latter died  on  September 11, 1957, and  Remigio  R. Espiritu, appellee's brother,  was  appointed executor of her  testate estate (Sp. Proc. No. 2826 of  the  same court).

On May 20, 1959, appellants-nearest relatives and heirs of the deceased Marcosa-filed a motion  for  contempt  in the guardianship proceedings against appellee due to her failure to  render an  accounting of  the properties  of her deceased ward.   In its order of September 29,  1959, the Court  denied the  motion but directed  appellee to render an accounting within a period of one month from notice. Pursuant thereto, appellee filed her verified Final Report of Accounts on October 29, 1959, to which appellants filed a written opposition, alleging,  among  other things, that it was incomplete as it did not account for certain personal properties  of the ward and other fruits  of her estate. But  on the date  set for the hearing of the report, appellants and their counsel  did not appear.  Thereafter, the Court, finding said report to be "reasonable and in order", approved it. Appellants' motion for reconsideration having  been denied,  they  took the present appeal.

The only assignment of  error submitted  by appellants is to the effect that the   lower court erred in approving the  report  mentioned heretofore  without receiving  any evidence in support thereof, inspite of the fact  that the same appeared to be incomplete. We find this  claim to be without merit.

As the lower court observed, the report was  verified, and  the opposition thereto filed by  appellants was couched in general terms and was not under oath.  To this must be added the circumstance that appellants failed to appear on the day set for the hearing and, consequently, failed to substantiate  the claim  advanced in  their opposition. We can not say, therefore, that the lower court  erred in finding the final report of accounts in question to be "reasonable", considering that the same was detailed  and  was supported by the affidavit of the guardian.

Moreover,  appellants' motion for reconsideration  was not  verified  nor supported with  any  kind of  evidence reasonably supporting their claim  that  appellee's report was  incomplete. Neither did it specify the  jewelries allegedly belonging to the deceased incompetent  Marcosa Rivera, received by the guardian and not included in her final statement of accounts. We find,  therefore,  that the lower court  was  justified  in  denying the same.

Wherefore, the order  appealed from is affirmed,  with costs.

Bengzon, C. J. Padilla, Barrera, Parades,  Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.