G.R. No. L-30994 - Basa vs. Aguilar

Petitioners: Olimpia Basa, Arsencio Basa, Nemesio Basa, Ricardo Basa, Atanacia Basa, Juliana Basa, and Feliciano Basa, owners as co‑indiviso of an undivided ½ share of a parcel of land.
Respondents:

Private respondents Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina, owners of the remaining undivided ½ share of the same land.
Private respondents Primo Tiongson and Macaria Puyat, to whom the ½ share was sold.

The subject property is a parcel of land located in Barrio San Mateo, Arayat, Pampanga measuring approximately 32,383 square meters.
Ownership was divided equally where the petitioners owned ½ share and the respondents (Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina) owned the other ½ share.

On March 6, 1964, Genaro Puyat, with the marital consent of Brigida Mesina, sold his ½ share of the subject property for the price of ₱1,000.00.
The sale was executed in favor of Primo Tiongson and Macaria Puyat, with Primo being the son-in-law of Genaro Puyat and Macaria as their daughter.

On March 13, 1964, the petitioners filed Civil Case No. 2513, seeking to exercise their right of legal redemption under Article 1620 of the Civil Code.
The petitioners deposited the sum of ₱1,000.00 as the redemption money.

The trial court rendered a judgment dismissing the petitioners’ claim to exercise the right of redemption.
The court’s reasoning included:

The proposition that there is no repugnant public policy in a parent selling property to a child, emphasizing that children of a co-owner have an inchoate right of succession.
The view that including the children of a co-owner within the term “third person” would lead to “ludicrous” and overly expansive interpretations of the law.

The trial court essentially rejected the petitioners’ reliance on Article 1620 of the Civil Code by focusing on a familial connection rather than the literal and purposive interpretation of the law.

Article 1620 provides that a co-owner may exercise the right of redemption if the shares of the other co-owner(s) are sold to a third person.
It allows for the redemption of the property share, at a reasonable price if the selling price is deemed grossly excessive, and requires proportional participation if multiple co-owners desire to redeem.
The intent is to provide a legal remedy that minimizes undesirable or inconvenient co-ownership by allowing a co-owner to avoid forced association with others.

Whether the petitioners, as co-owners holding an undivided share of the property, are entitled to exercise the right of legal redemption under Article 1620 of the Civil Code.

Does the sale of the ½ share to a third person trigger the right of redemption even in the context of familial or inchoate succession rights?
Should the familial relationship (i.e., the fact that Primo Tiongson is married to Macaria Puyat, a daughter of Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina) affect the interpretation of who qualifies as a “third person” under Article 1620?

Whether a family member or someone related by marriage qualifies as a “third person” distinct from a co-owner for the purposes of right of redemption.
How the principle of minimizing co-ownership, which is the underlying public policy, interacts with any familial or inchoate rights of succession.

Whether the conveyance of property by onerous title during the lifetime of the owners alters the rights of redemption for the petitioners.
Whether the legal concept of redemption as a privilege to avoid inconvenient co-ownership applies when one share is alienated to someone not holding a co‑ownership interest.