Case Digest (G.R. No. L-15499)
Facts:
Angela M. Butte v. Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc., G.R. No. L-15499, February 28, 1962, the Supreme Court En Banc, Reyes, J., writing for the Court (with Resolutions of April 23, 1962). Plaintiff-appellant Angela M. Butte was a beneficiary under the last will and testament of Jose V. Ramirez, in which she was bequeathed one-third of the free portion; the testament had been admitted to probate but the estate remained unsettled because creditors’ claims exceeded assets and the Bank of the Philippine Islands was acting as judicial administrator. Title to a house and lot in Sta. Cruz, Manila, stood in Transfer Certificate of Title No. 52789 in the names of six co-owners, including Jose V. Ramirez (1/6) and Marie Gamier Vda. de Ramirez (1/6).On December 9, 1958, Marie Gamier Vda. de Ramirez sold her undivided 1/6 share to Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc. for P500,000. An affidavit by the vendor’s attorney-in-fact stated that written notices to possible redemptioners had been sent, and the deed was registered; a new title was issued in the vendee’s name and the other co-owners. The vendee sent a notice of sale to the Bank as judicial administrator, and the vendor’s attorney-in-fact also sent a confirming letter; those communications reached Mrs. Butte (through her counsel) between December 16 and December 19, 1958.
By letter dated January 15, 1959, Mrs. Butte (through counsel) tendered to Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc. a Philippine National Bank cashier’s check for P500,000 offering to redeem the sold 1/6 share; the tender was refused, whereupon she consigned the same amount in court and filed an action for legal redemption (retracto de comuneros), seeking conveyance and damages. The Court of First Instance of Manila tried the case and, by decision dated May 13, 1959, dismissed her complaint on grounds that she had no right to redeem and that, if she had, she had exercised it beyond the thirty-day period prescribed by law; the defendant’s counterclaim for damages was also dismissed for lack of proof. Both parties appealed directly to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court (Feb. 28, 1962) reversed the trial court, holding that Mrs. Butte, as heir and co-owner from the moment of her predecessor’s death, had the right of legal redemption and that her tender of January 15, 1959 was timely; it ordered reconveyance and accounting for rents and fruits. Upon a timely motion for reconsideration by Manuel Uy & Sons, Inc., t...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- As a procedural/substantive question: Can a testamentary heir (appellant) exercise the right of legal redemption over a co-owner’s sold undivided share despite the existence of a judicial administrator and pending distribution of the decedent’s estate?
- As to timing: Did appellant exercise the right of legal redemption within the thirty-da...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)