Case Summary (G.R. No. 188314)
Relevant Facts
Paz Torres and Enrique Torres were co-owners of a property, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 197-A1230 (T-3827), inherited from their parents. On September 15, 1949, Enrique sold his half interest in the property to the Raffinans for ₱13,000, with a one-year right to repurchase. After additional advances from the Raffinans, Enrique executed a deed of absolute sale on April 3, 1951, transferring his interest for ₱28,000, of which Paz Torres and her husband were unaware until August 19, 1952. Following their discovery, the Conejeros attempted to redeem the property starting on the same date but were met with the claim by the Raffinans that the right to redemption had lapsed due to the failure to notify them in writing.
Court Proceedings
The Conejeros filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Cebu, seeking a ruling to compel the Raffinans to allow their redemption of the property. The trial court ruled that the deed of sale constituted an equitable mortgage and granted the Conejeros the right to redeem for ₱34,000. However, upon appeal, the Court of Appeals overturned this decision, asserting that the sale was legitimate and that the Conejeros had failed to exercise their right of redemption within the appropriate timeframe.
Issues of Legal Notice and Redemption Rights
The primary issue revolved around whether the Conejeros' rights to redeem lapsed due to a lack of written notice of the sale. The Court of Appeals noted that while the Conejeros did not receive written notice, they gained knowledge of the sale on August 19, 1952, when Enrique Torres provided evidence of the sale. Pursuant to Article 1623 of the Civil Code, written notice is required for the 30-day redemption period to commence.
Requirement of Tender of Redemption Price
The appellants contended that they made a valid offer to redeem; however, the Court concluded that their offer was insufficient. The petitioners offered ₱10,000 by check without an immediate tender of the full sale price of ₱28,000 as recited in the deed. The Court maintained that a bona fide redemption requires both a valid offer and timely payment of the entire price, as partial payment was not permissible under the law.
Legal Reasoning and Rulings
The ruling emphasized that Article 1623 necessitates a clear and complete tender of the redemption price for the right to be validly exercis
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 188314)
Case Background
- Petitioners Paz Torres de Conejero and Enrique Conejero seek the review and reversal of the Court of Appeals’ decision in CA-GR No. 19634-R.
- The case involves a dispute over the right to redeem an undivided half interest in a property in Cebu City, originally owned by the petitioners' co-owner, Enrique Torres.
- Enrique Torres sold his half interest to the Raffinan spouses for P13,000 with a right to repurchase, which was later executed as an absolute sale for P28,000 after the expiration of the repurchase period.
Relevant Facts
- Paz Torres and Enrique Torres inherited a lot and building in Cebu City, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 197-A1230 (T-3827).
- The right to repurchase expired on September 15, 1950, but Enrique sold his interest to the Raffinans on April 3, 1951.
- The Conejeros only became aware of the absolute sale on August 19, 1952, upon receiving a copy of the deed from Enrique Torres.
Legal Proceedings
- The Conejeros filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Cebu on October 4, 1952, to compel redemption.
- The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of the Conejeros, categorizing the deed of sale as an equitable mortgage.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed this decision, affirming the Raffinans' tit