Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
c FACTS:
s
against P for the latters refusal to partition the conjugal properties of
the Spouses Aquino.
They pray for the order of partition of the properties between P and R in
equal shares and to order the P to render an accounting of the produce of
:
the land in question from the time defendants forcibly took possession until
partition shall have been effected. Why? Respondent alleged that before
Leoncia de Guzman died, she called for a conference, which had
been attended by Cesario Velasquez, Anatalia De Guzman and petitioners
A
Santiago Meneses and Tranquilina de Guzman, wherein Leonciatold Anatalia,
Tranquilina and Cesario that the documents of donation and partition which
she and her husband earlier executed were not signed by them as it was not
their intention to give away all the properties to Cesario because Anatalia who
is one of her sisters had several children to support. Cesario then promised to
c
divide the properties equally and to give the plaintiffs one-half (1/2)
thereof; that they are entitled to of each of all the properties in
question being the children of Anatalia. But Petitioner forcibly took
possession of all the properties and despite Respondents repeated demands
r
for partition,Petitioner refused.
3.Petitioner counter-claimed that during the lifetime of spouses
Aquino, they had already disposed of their properties in favor of
petitioners predecessors-in-interest, Cesario and Camila de Guzman and
i
petitioners Anastacia and Jose Velasquez; that there was no conference
happened; and that the instant case is already barred by res judicata since
there had been three previous cases involving the same parties, subject
matter and cause of action which were all dismissed.
4.(1992) TC ruled in favour of Respondent.
m The Court found Santiago Meneses and his testimony were credible. He
is 80 years old testified spontaneously in a clear, straight forward and
convincing manner. Santiago said there was indeed a conference and
that he came across an affidavit of Cesario Velasquez notarized by Atty.
n
conveyance to Cesario, Camila, Anastacia and Jose.
I n a d d i t i o n , R f a i l e d t o p r o v e t h e i r allegations that the Spouses
Aquino disposed of their properties during their lifetime.
a
Mejo discriminating kasi sabi ng TC : Petitioner Eliseo Velasquez is a lawyer
and his co-defendant brothers are retired government officials. On the
other hand, the respondents are simple, innocent country folks who
have not obtained substantial level of education. The Court believes
and so holds that the petitioners manipulated the transfer unto
themselves all the properties of Spouses Aquino; thus, depriving the
respondents their shares in the inheritance, to their prejudice and damage.
5.(1995) CA affirmed decision. CA rejected the defense of res
judicata which was never pleaded nor raised earlier, and for that
reason was deemed waived. The appellate court also dismissed the claim of
prescription as an action for partition is imprescriptible. As regards the
previous transfers executed in favor of P,
the court affirmed the trial courts finding that the transfers were
repudiated before the death of Leoncia. (1996) Motion for Recon was
denied.
Issue:
Held:
NO.
Petitioner: (1) The instant case is barred by res judicata. (2) Santiago
Meneses failed to prove the nullity of the Deeds of Conveyance andDeeds of
Donation executed by the Spouses Aquino. (3) If there was no nullity of the
said deeds, private respondents were not the legal heirs of Spouses Aquino.
(4) Partition is the proper action in this case.
Respondent: (1) The issue of res judicata has been sufficiently discussed and
considered and the TC opted to inquire into their legitimate grievance and
came up with a judicious determination of the case on the merits. (2) and (3)
no answer. (4) No, the court correctly ruled that the instant action for partition
is proper.
SC: (1) Contrary to CAs decision that the defense of res judicata was never
pleaded nor raised earlier, and for that reason was deemed waived, the
records show that it was raised in the petitioners Amended Answer
filed before the trial court. On this ground alone, the trial court
should have already dismissed this case. However, SC chose to
resolve the case, disregarding procedural issues for the dispense of
substantial justice.(2) TRUE. No evidence to support factual findings on
Santiago Meneses claims of holding of conference and Cesarios adoption
papers.(3) TRUE.
OR
DOCTRINE:
An action for partition will not lie if the claimant has no rightful interest over the
subject property. A donation as a mode of acquiring ownership results in an
effective transfer of title over the property from the donor to the donee and the
donation is perfected from the moment the donor knows of the acceptance by
the donee. And once a donation is accepted. The donee becomes the
absolute owner of the property donated.
FACTS:
ISSUE:
HELD:
No. In actions for partition, the court cannot properly issue an order to divide
the