Title
Averia vs. Averia
Case
G.R. No. 141877
Decision Date
Aug 13, 2004
Family dispute over Manila property; verbal sales contested under Statute of Frauds. Supreme Court upheld validity of executed contracts, remanded for partition.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 141877)

Facts:

Family Background and Property Ownership

  • Macaria Francisco (Macaria) and Marcos Averia were married and had six children: Gregorio, Teresa, Domingo, Angel, Felipe, and Felimon.
  • After Marcos' death, Macaria married Roberto Romero (Romero), who died on February 28, 1968, leaving three adjoining residential lots in Sampaloc, Manila.
  • Through a Deed of Extrajudicial Partition and Summary Settlement, Macaria was apportioned a house and lot at 725 Extremadura Street, Sampaloc, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 93310.

Litigation Over Romero's Estate

  • Macaria filed a case (Civil Case No. 79955) on June 1, 1970, alleging fraud in the partition of Romero's estate. The case lasted ten years, and the Court of Appeals awarded Macaria an additional 30 square meters of the estate.
  • Gregorio and his family, along with Teresa's family, lived with Macaria at Extremadura until her death on March 28, 1983.

Dispute Over the Extremadura Property

  • On January 19, 1989, Domingo, Angel, Felipe, and Susan Pelayo (widow of Felimon) filed a complaint for judicial partition of the Extremadura property, including the 30 square meters awarded by the Court of Appeals.
  • Gregorio and Sylvanna Vergara (representing Teresa) countered that Gregorio and his late wife Agripina had spent P20,000.00 (now equivalent to P200,000.00) on litigation expenses and cared for Macaria during her illness. They claimed Macaria verbally sold them half of the property, and Domingo sold his 1/6 share to Gregorio.

Trial Court Decision

  • The trial court ruled in favor of Gregorio and Sylvanna, finding that Gregorio had paid Domingo P10,000.00 for his share and that Macaria had awarded Gregorio half of the property. The court ordered the remaining 5/6 of the half to be partitioned among the heirs.

Court of Appeals Decision

  • The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, ruling that the alleged verbal sales violated the Statute of Frauds (Article 1403 of the Civil Code) and were unenforceable. The case was remanded for partition.

Issue:

  1. Whether there was a valid sale of half of Macaria's interest in the Extremadura property to Gregorio.
  2. Whether the reception of parol evidence to prove Domingo's sale of his 1/6 share to Gregorio was proper.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court granted the petition, set aside the Court of Appeals' decision, and remanded the case to the trial court for partition in accordance with Rule 69 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.