Title
Reyes vs. Spouses Garcia
Case
G.R. No. 225159
Decision Date
Mar 21, 2022
Julian Reyes' heirs disputed property sale; SC ruled partition proper, upholding Isidoro's sale of his undivided share, requiring partition for specific claims.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 225159)

Antecedents

Reynaldo Reyes claims ownership of a 463 square meter parcel of land, originally owned by his grandfather, Julian Reyes. After Julian and his wife Marcela died in 1944 and 1964, respectively, their nine children inherited the property. In 1975, the heirs executed an informal partition, selling half of the land to Anastacio, while other portions were occupied by some heirs and sold to the spouses Garcia in 1989. Petitioner subsequently filed a lawsuit questioning the validity of the spouses Garcia's title based on Isidoro, another heir, selling his share without consent from other heirs.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

The RTC dismissed the petitioner’s complaint on April 12, 2013, affirming that the jurisdiction is established through the plaintiff's claims and that the assessed value of the property doesn't affect jurisdiction. The court concluded all heirs remain co-owners of the property. It ruled that while Isidoro could sell his share, he could not dispose of the interests of others without their consent. The court highlighted the necessity for partition as the lawful remedy, dismissing claims for recovery or nullification.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The CA upheld the RTC's ruling on February 16, 2016, asserting the trial court maintained jurisdiction over the subject matter and acknowledging petitioner’s standing as a real party in interest. The appellate court emphasized that only Isidoro's share could be sold, but the remedy for the dispute was partition, implying a recognition of co-ownership but not allowing specific possession claims until the property is legally partitioned.

Petitioner's Arguments

Petitioner contends that partitioning the property would be impractical and render it unserviceable for family living. He asserts that Isidoro sold more than his pro-rata share, violating the interests of other heirs, thus requesting the de facto nullification of the transaction involving spouses Garcia concerning the interests of the other heirs.

Arguments of the Spouses Garcia

The spouses Garcia counter that the issues raised by the petitioner merely reiterate prior arguments presented to the CA and do not introduce new questions of law appropriate for review under Rule 45. They assert the petitioner’s claims lack merit and that the courts correctly ruled the parcel's ownership issues revolve around partition, not nullification of the sale.

Our Ruling

The Supreme Court found the petition without merit, reiterating that a co-owner may sell their share without the other co-owners' consent, but the sale does not render it absolute over the entire property. The court emphasized that Isidoro's sale affected only his share, allowing the spouses Garcia ownership of his undivided inte

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.