Saturnino v. Paulino
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Upon the death of Jaime Luz Paulino, he was survived by his children and a grandson, Quirico L. Saturnino. His daughter, Feliza Luz Paulino, sold a house and lot, part of the inheritance, to spouses Maximo Daleja, Juana Lucas, Nemesio Lucas, and Donata Guillermo for P1,200.00. Quirico L. Saturnino, claiming his right as a co-heir, offered to redeem the property by tendering 4/5 of the purchase price plus expenses. The vendees refused. Saturnino then filed an action for declaration of illegality of the sale with respect to his share, reconveyance, and damages, depositing the redemption amount with the Clerk of Court. Procedural History: The defendants alleged that the property in question was verbally assigned to Feliza Luz Paulino as her exclusive share in a prior division of inheritance. Meanwhile, Quirico L. Saturnino filed a petition for the probate of Jaime Luz Paulino's will, which was eventually allowed. The defendants filed a supplemental answer, arguing Saturnino lacked legal capacity to sue as the property was part of an estate under testate proceedings. The Court of First Instance (CFI) declared the sale null and void with respect to 1/5 of the lot, declaring Saturnino the owner thereof, and ordered the defendants to accept reimbursement and execute a deed of reconveyance. The Petition: The defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA, instead of passing upon the issues raised, declared that a prejudicial question existed, stating that pending partition and adjudication of the estate in the testate proceedings, no heir could claim ownership or dispose of any portion of the residue, and thus the sale and any prior agreement were of no legal effect without court sanction. The CA reversed the CFI decision and dismissed the complaint. Quirico L. Saturnino filed the present petition for review by certiorari.
Issue(s)
Whether the right of legal redemption among co-heirs can be validly exercised pending the partition of the estate in a probate proceeding.
Ruling
The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals, and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings. The Court held that the right of redemption of a co-heir is exercisable before partition, and the pendency of testate proceedings does not extinguish this right if the sale occurred prior to the administrator taking custody of the property. The Court found that the Court of Appeals did not pass upon the essential issues raised by the parties.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeals' conclusion—that successional rights are a mere 'hope' pending partition—is legally erroneous. Under Article 657 and Article 661 of the Civil Code of Spain (applicable at the time of death), rights to succession are transmitted at the moment of death, and heirs succeed to all rights and obligations of the deceased by that very fact. The right of legal redemption granted to co-heirs under Article 1067 is explicitly designated to be exercised before partition; once partition is completed and properties are adjudicated, the status of co-heirship ceases and the special right of redemption expires. If the property is adjudicated to one heir, they become the sole owner; if adjudicated pro-indiviso, the parties become co-owners, shifting the applicable law to Article 1522. Furthermore, the Court clarified that the house and lot were not in custodia legis because the sale occurred before the probate case was filed, and the buyers were already in possession. The Court noted that even if a judicial administrator were appointed, they could not summarily seize property from third parties claiming ownership without instituting a separate civil action. Thus, the existence of a probate proceeding does not block the exercise of the right of redemption by a co-heir against a stranger who purchased hereditary rights.
Main Doctrine
The right of redemption among co-heirs under Article 1067 of the Civil Code of Spain (now Article 1088 of the Civil Code of the Philippines) is exercisable only before the partition of the inherited property, and it is not extinguished by the mere fact that the property is included in the inventory of the estate under testate proceedings, provided the sale of hereditary rights occurred prior to the institution of such proceedings or before the administrator took custody of the property.