Case Digest (G.R. No. 141669)
Facts:
In Heirs of Cesar Marasigan vs. Apolonio, Lilia, Octavio, Jr., et al., G.R. No. 156078, decided on March 14, 2008 under the 1987 Constitution, the petitioners are the heirs of the late Cesar Marasigan, who succeeded to his rights after his death on October 25, 2001. The respondents are Apolonio, Lilia, Octavio Jr., Horacio, Benito Jr., and Marissa Marasigan, plaintiffs in Special Civil Action No. P-77-97 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 31 in Pili, Camarines Sur, which seeks the partition of the estate of their deceased sister, Alicia Marasigan. Alicia died intestate and without issue on January 21, 1995, owning a 2/21 pro-indiviso share in thirteen parcels of Hacienda Sta. Rita totaling approximately 496 hectares in Pili and Minalabac, Camarines Sur, plus other properties in Batangas and Camarines Sur. On December 17, 1997, private respondents filed for judicial partition of Alicia’s estate, naming Cesar as defendant. Cesar in his answer sought inclusion of additioCase Digest (G.R. No. 141669)
Facts:
- Parties and Procedural Posture
- Petitioners – Heirs of Cesar Marasigan (Luz Regina, Cesar Jr., Benito, Santiago, Renato, Jose, Geraldo, Orlando, Peter, Paul, Mauricio, Rommel, Michael, Gabriel, Maria Luz).
- Private Respondents – Apolonio, Lilia, Octavio Jr., Horacio, Benito Jr., Marissa Marasigan.
- Cesar (now deceased) filed Answer and sought inclusion of additional properties in partition; private respondents contested.
- Subject Matter of Partition
- Estate of Alicia Marasigan (died intestate, 21 Jan 1995), survived by siblings and nephews/nieces; owned pro-indiviso 2/21 share in 13 parcels (“Hacienda Sta. Rita”) totalling 496 ha across Pili and Minalabac, Camarines Sur.
- Cesar claimed other properties (San Juan, Batangas lands; Sipocot lands; Bolbok Rural Bank shares) but these were held previously partitioned.
- Trial Court Proceedings (RTC Branch 31, Pili)
- Dec 1997 – Complaint for judicial partition filed; Rico 2000 Order issued:
- Determined Alicia’s 2/21 share = 422,422.65 sqm; each heir’s 1/7 share = 67,496.09 sqm.
- Ordered per capita/stirpes partition among heirs and confirmed previous San Juan partitions.
- Parties failed to physically agree; Apr 2000 – Motion to appoint commissioners granted.
- Commissioners’ Proceedings
- Two commissioners appointed; Oct 2000 – Viewed estate without Cesar’s presence (he claimed no notice).
- Nov 2000 Report: found physical division impractical; recommended assignment of each 1/7 share to any willing heir at P700,000/ha (≈ P4,724,726.30 per share).
- Cesar opposed; Feb 2001 – RTC approved recommendations in toto; June 2001 Motion for Reconsideration denied.
- Cesar died Oct 2001; heirs substituted and pursued reliefs.
- Appellate and Subsequent Proceedings
- Jul 2002 – Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed Petition for Certiorari (CA-G.R. SP No. 67529), holding no grave abuse of discretion, due process observed, Sec. 5, Rule 69 R.C.P. covers impracticality.
- Petitioners’ motion for reconsideration denied Nov 2002.
- Dec 2002 – Petition for Review (Rule 45) filed with S.C. (G.R. No. 156078).
- Feb 2003 – Public auction of petitioners’ 1/7 share; sold for P3,777,689.00 after DAR acquisition of 100 ha.
- Petitioners sought annulment of sale, appeal of Omnibus Order; RTC denied due course; CA dismissed subsequent certiorari petitions; final SC resolution Oct 2004.
Issues:
- Jurisdiction and Cause of Action
- Whether RTC lacked subject-matter jurisdiction or cause of action for partition of unsegregated pro-indiviso share and unpaid docket fees.
- Due Process in Commissioners’ Proceedings
- Whether failure to give Cesar notice of viewing/examination violated Sec. 4, Rule 69 R.C.P. and deprived him of due process.
- Grounds for Assignment vs. Physical Partition
- Whether Sec. 5, Rule 69 R.C.P. allows assignment only upon proof of “prejudice” and whether “physical impossibility/impracticality” qualify.
- Whether application of Articles 494, 495, 498 N.C.C. and Sec. 5, Rule 69 altered substantive rights.
- Writ of Certiorari Reviewability
- Whether factual findings of impracticality and commission’s discretion are reviewable by certiorari under Rule 65.
- Validity of Public Auction Sale
- Whether sale of petitioners’ 1/7 share is null and void or unduly deficient in price.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)