Scribd
Upload
497 views2 pages

G.R. No. 94918

Petitioners, who are siblings, filed a lawsuit to annul the auction sale of five parcels of land that were co-owned by petitioners and registered under their deceased father's name. This was to satisfy a judgment against their mother and a realty corporation. The court ruled that petitioners' proprietary interests in the properties were distinct from their mother's as they derived their ownership rights as children of their deceased father, not because of their mother. Therefore, petitioners were within their rights to file suit to protect their own interests in the properties from being sold due to judgments against their mother.

Uploaded by

CAJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
497 views2 pages

G.R. No. 94918

Petitioners, who are siblings, filed a lawsuit to annul the auction sale of five parcels of land that were co-owned by petitioners and registered under their deceased father's name. This was to satisfy a judgment against their mother and a realty corporation. The court ruled that petitioners' proprietary interests in the properties were distinct from their mother's as they derived their ownership rights as children of their deceased father, not because of their mother. Therefore, petitioners were within their rights to file suit to protect their own interests in the properties from being sold due to judgments against their mother.

Uploaded by

CAJ
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

DANILO I.

SUAREZ, EUFROCINA SUAREZ-ANDRES, MARCELO


I. SUAREZ, JR., EVELYN SUAREZ-DE LEON and REGINIO I.
SUAREZ
vs.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, VALENTE RAYMUNDO, VIOLETA
RAYMUNDO, MA. CONCEPCION VITO and VIRGINIA BANTA
G.R. No. 94918, September 2, 1992
NOCON, J.

Facts:
Petitioners are brothers and sisters. Their father died in 1955
and since then his estate consisting of several valuable parcels of
land has been liquidated or partitioned. In 1977, petitioners’ widowed
mother and Rizal Realty Corporation lost in the consolidated cases for
rescission of contract and for damages, and were ordered by the
Court to pay, jointly and severally, herein respondents the aggregate
principal amount of about P70, 000.00 as damages.

The judgment against petitioner’s mother and Rizal Realty


Corporation having become final and executory, five (5) valuable
parcel of land were levied and sold on execution in favor of the
private respondents. On June 21, 1984 before the expiration of the
redemption period, petitioners filed a reinvindicatory action against
private respondents and the Provincial Sheriff of Rizal for the
annulment of the auction sale and the recovery of the ownership of
the levied pieces of property. Therein, they alleged, among others,
that being strangers to the case decided against their mother, they
cannot be held liable therefor and that the five (5) parcels of land, of
which they are co-owners, can neither be levied nor sold on
execution.

Issue:
Whether or not private respondents can validly acquire all the
five (5) parcels of land co-owned by petitioners and registered in the
name of petitioner’s deceased father.

Ruling:
The law in point is Article 777 of the Civil Code, the law
applicable at the time of the institution of the case."The rights to the
succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the
decedent."

Article 888 further provides:"The legitime of the legitimate


children and descendants consists of one-half of the hereditary estate
of the father and of the mother.The latter may freely dispose of the
remaining half, subject to the rights of illegitimate children and of the
surviving spouse as hereinafter provided."

Article 892 par. 2 likewise provides:"If there are two or more


legitimate children or descendants, the surviving spouse shall be
entitled to a portion equal to the legitime of each of the legitimate
children or descendants."

Thus, from the foregoing, the legitime of the surviving spouse


is equal to the legitime of each child.

The proprietary interest of petitioners in the levied and


auctioned property is different from and adverse to that of their
mother. Petitioners became co-owners of the property not because of
their mother but through their own right as children of their deceased
father. Therefore, petitioners are not barred in any way from
instituting the action to annul the auction sale to protect their own
interests.

You might also like