Title
Felices vs. Colegado
Case
G.R. No. L-23374
Decision Date
Sep 30, 1970
Heirs partitioned homestead; Maria sold share, later repurchased by Colegado. Teofila sought redemption; SC ruled partition ended co-ownership, no redemption right.
Font Size:

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-23374)

Right of Legal Redemption and Co-Ownership

  • The right of legal redemption under Articles 1620 and 1088 of the Civil Code cannot be invoked by the plaintiff-appellant, Teofila Felices, because she was not a co-owner of the property at the time of its sale by her sister, Maria Felices, to the defendant-appellee, Francisco Colegado.
  • The community of interest among the heirs ceased after they extrajudicially partitioned the homestead following their father's death, with each heir taking exclusive possession of their respective shares.

Inapplicability of Article 1088

  • Article 1088 of the Civil Code is not applicable in this case as it pertains to situations where a co-heir sells their share before the partition of the estate.
  • The article assumes that the estate has not yet been distributed among the heirs; once partition occurs, the heirs become co-owners rather than mere co-heirs.

Concept of Co-Ownership

  • Co-ownership is defined as the ownership of an undivided thing or right by different persons, where each co-owner has equal rights over the whole property despite potentially unequal shares.
  • The plaintiff-appellant's claim fails because she and her siblings had already divided the homestead, thus ending their co-ownership status.

No Right of Legal Redemption Among Co-Owners

  • The plaintiff-appellant cannot redeem the property from the defendant-appellee because they are both co-owners, and the right of legal redemption does not exist between co-owners.
  • The legal framework does not allow for one co-owner to redeem property from another once co-ownership is established.

Legal Precedent on Redemption Rights

  • The ruling in Viola v. Roura and Tecson clarifies that the right of legal redemption is not limited to original co-owners but extends to those who acquire shares while the community exists.
  • However, in this case, since both parties are co-owners, the right of redemption does not apply.

Background of the Case

  • The case involves a homestead inherited from Felipe Felices, which was partitioned among his children after his death.
  • Maria Felices sold her share to Roman Iriola with a right of repurchase, which was later sold to Francisco Colegado after a series of legal proceedings.

Court's Findings and Conclusion

  • The trial court found that the partition of the homestead was undisputed and conferred exclusive ownership to each heir over their...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.