G.R. No. 206667 - Silva vs. Lo

GUILLERMA S. SILVA, petitioner, was one of the seven legitimate children and compulsory heirs of Carlos Sandico, Jr.
CONCHITA S. LO, respondent, was another legitimate child and compulsory heir of Carlos Sandico, Jr.
Other compulsory heirs included the surviving spouse Concepcion Lim-Sandico, Ma. Enrica Sandico-Pascual, Carlos L. Sandico III, Lily Sandico-Brown, Pamela S. Zapanta, and Teodoro L. Sandico.
Carlos Sandico, Jr. died intestate on May 20, 1975, leaving a sizeable estate composed of numerous properties.

In 1976, the heirs executed an Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate declaring ownership *pro indiviso* among the heirs.
In September 1988, the heirs executed a Memorandum of Agreement for physical division of the estate, which was not implemented.
The heirs remained *pro indiviso* co-owners pending judicial partition.

On August 3, 1989, Enrica filed Civil Case No. Q-89-3137 for partition, accounting, delivery of shares and damages, impleading the other heirs.
Teodoro later withdrew as defendant and joined as plaintiff-in-intervention.
Parties stipulated at pre-trial that the case involved the surviving spouse and seven legitimate children; that decedent died intestate; and that an Extrajudicial Settlement dated November 18, 1976 distributed the intestate estate *pro indiviso*.
Parties disputed usufruct claims by Concepcion, inventory and classification of properties, and modes of partition.

On September 1, 1994, the Registry of Deeds of Pampanga issued TCT No. 377745-R over a 103,024-square meter agricultural tract in Talimundok, San Agustin, Magalang, Pampanga, in the names of Concepcion and Carlos III, bearing memorandum of encumbrances listing the other heirs and noting Enrica’s lis pendens in Civil Case No. Q-89-3137.
The subject property later became the focus of separate partition agreements and raffles supervised by the RTC.

Court-supervised raffles, compromise drafts and January 11, 2000 Order for Partition

The RTC conducted raffles for aliquots of estate properties, with counsel or appointed attorneys-in-fact drawing for absent heirs.
The parties engaged in prolonged negotiations and exchanged multiple drafts of a compromise agreement.
On January 11, 2000, the RTC issued an Order of Partition declaring the case submitted for decision on the basis of the parties’ agreements and incorporated the final Compromise Agreement dated September 17, 1998; the Order was final and appealable.
No party appealed the January 11, 2000 Order for Partition.

Multiple heirs executed Special Powers of Attorney (SPA) in favor of Concepcion or Guillerma for representation in the partition proceedings.
On June 8, 1999, Conchita executed an SPA in favor of Concepcion granting broad authority to represent her in the case and to enter into partition agreements.
On June 26, 2000, Conchita executed a Revocation of SPA and filed a copy with the RTC but did not furnish her mother Concepcion with notice of the revocation.

Portions of the estate, including the subject property, were covered by Republic Act No. 6657 (The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) and were subject to distribution to qualified tenant-beneficiaries.
The heirs, represented by Concepcion, executed a Kasunduan dated May 19, 1999 providing for a 50-50 sharing: half to heirs and half to qualified tenants.
In 2006, Concepcion, purporting to represent herself and several heirs including Guillerma and Conchita, executed a second agreement titled "Kasunduan sa Pagwawakas/Pagtatapos..." (the 2006 Kasunduan) effecting partition of the subject property with half to eight tenants and half retained by the heirs.
Plaintiffs ceased opposition to a proposed subdivision plan and raffle for distribution of the subject property, and Minutes of Raffle were filed.

On April 13, 2007, the RTC granted defendants’ Motion for Approval of New Agreement and Subdivision Plan dated May 24, 2006, approved the new agreement and subdivision plan, and ordered plaintiffs to sign the documents.
The RTC noted agreement among parties to a raffle held on March 30, 2007 for distribution of the subject property.
On May 26, 2009, Concepcion moved to order the Register of Deeds to enter new titles to effect the RTC’s April 13, 2007 Order.
The Register of Deed...(Subscriber-Only)

Whether the petition for certiorari filed by CONCHITA S. LO was the proper remedy to assail the RTC’s February 9 and August 27, 2010 Orders and, implicitly, the April 13, 2007 Order.
Whether the tenants of the subject property were indispensable or necessary parties who should have been impleaded in CONCHITA S. LO’s petition for certiorari.
Whether the RTC’s April 13, 2007 Order approving the 2006 Kasunduan had attained finality and was appealable under Section 2, Rule 69, Rules of Court in relation to Section 1, Rule 41, Rules of Court.

Whether the RTC Orders dated April 13, 2007, February 9, 2010 and August 27, 2010 were void for violation of Rule 69, Rules of Court.
Whether the RTC effectively distributed the decedent’s estate to persons who were not heirs by approving transfer and titling of half of the subject property to the...(Subscriber-Only)