Rule 72 – Subject Matter and Applicability of General Rules 2.
2. The petitioners executed an Extrajudicial Settlement with Sale of the Estate of
G.R. 162956–Reyes Esperidon v. Enriquez
PUNO, C.J.
Petitioners claim to be the lawful heirs of Dionisia Reyes, co-owner of a subject parcel of
land located in Talisay, Cebu, the other owner of the land beingAnacleto Cabrera.
Meanwhile,respondents, Peter Enriquez and Deborah Enriquez (husband and daughter of
Etta Cabrera-Enriquez respectively), claim to be the heirs of Anacleto Cabrera, Etta's
father. Enriquez and his daughter Deborah sold a part of their alleged portion of the
property to Sps. Fernandez. When the latter tried to register their share in the land, they
discovered that certain documents, due to the ownership of the heirs of Dionisia Reyes,
barred them from doing so. Respondents filed a complaint for annulment/ nullification of
such documents and prayed for the repartition and re-subdivision of the property. RTC
dismissed the case upon motion of the plaintiffs on the ground that what the respondents
were seeking were to be declared legal heirs of Anacleto Cabrera – something which
cannot be done in an ordinary civil action, as in this case, but through a special proceeding
specifically instituted for the purpose. The CA reversed the RTC. The SC reversed the CA
and reinstated the RTC ruling, holding that since the respondents seek to establish a right
or status, the proper remedy is a special proceeding.
DOCTRINE
An ordinary civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcementor
protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong.A special proceeding, on the
other hand, is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right or a particular
fact
The Rules of Court provide that only a real party in interest is allowed toprosecute and
defend an action in court. A real party in interest is the one who stands to be benefited or
injured by the judgment in the suit or the one entitled to the avails thereof. Such interest, to
be considered a real interest, must be one which is present and substantial, as
distinguished from a mere expectancy, or a future, contingent, subordinate or
consequential interest.
A plaintiff is a real party in interest when he is the one who has a legal right to enforce or
protect. In this case, the respondents have to prove that they have such legal right before
they can properly institute the ordinary civil action they filed herein. They can establish
such legal right through a special proceeding.
The determination of who are the legal heirs of the deceased couple must be made in the
proper special proceedings in court, and not in an ordinary suit for reconveyance of
property. This must take precedence over the action for reconveyance
FACTS
1. Dionisia Reyes (Dionisia) co-owned a parcel of land with Anacleto Cabrera
(Anacleto).
PETITIONERS CLAIM THE FOLLOWING:
1. Dionisia had the following lawful heirs (which are the petitioners in this case):
a. Faustino Reyes
b. Esperidon Reyes
c. Julieta Rivera
d. EuticoDico, Jr.
Dionisia.
3. Thereafter, the petitioners and persons (unidentified in the case) whom they knew as
the heirs of Anacleto executed a Segregation of Real Estate and Confirmation of Sale
over the same property, which resulted in various TCTs being issued in the name of
the petitioners, Anacleto, a certain Archimedes Villaluz and another person named
Felipe Dico.
RESPONDENTS (Peter Enriquez and Deborah Enriquez) CLAIM THE FOLLOWING:
1. They are the predecessor-in-interest of Anacleto Cabrera.
a. Peter's wife, Etta (Deborah's mother) is the daughter of Anacleto
Cabrera.
b. Etta's sister, Graciana, sold her portion to Etta during her lifetime.
c. Thus, Etta is the sole owner of the one-half share of the subject parcel
of land.
d. Etta died and the property passed on to respondents by virtue of an
Extra-Judicial Settlement of Estate.
e. The respondents subsequently sold a portion of the subject land to the
Sps. Ferndandez.
2. When the Sps. Fernandez tried to register their share in the subject land, they
discovered that they were barred from doing so due to a couple of documents:
a. Affidavit by Anacleto stating that his share in the property is only 369
sq.m.
b. Affidavit by Dionisia stating that Anacleto only owned 1/3 of the lot while
302.55 sq.m. belongs to Dionisia and the remaining is co-owned by
NicolasaBacalso, Juan Reyes, Florentino Reyes, MaximianoDico
c. Extrajudicial settlement with sale of Dionisia's Estate
d. Certificates of title in the name of the petitioners herein
e. Deed of segregation of the real estate and confirmation of sale
3. Alleging that the foregoing documents are fraudulent and fictitious, respondents
filed a complaint for annulment or nullification of the aforementioned documents
and for damages. They also prayed for "repartition and resubdivision".
4. The RTC held in favor of the petitioners and dismissed the case filed by the
respondents on the ground that respondents should first be declared as legal
heirs in a special proceeding before they can have any right to institute the
foregoing ordinary civil action.
5. However, the CA reversed the RTC.
6. Hence this petition.
ISSUE with HOLDING
1. Whether or not the respondents have to institute a special proceeding first to
determine their status as Anacleto's heirs before they can an ordinary civil action to
nullify the mentioned documents and repartition the land. – YES.
a. An ordinary civil action is one by which a party sues another for the
enforcementor protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a
wrong.A special proceeding, on the other hand, is a remedy by which a
party seeks to establish a status, a right or a particular fact.
b. The Rules of Court provide that only a real party in interest is allowed
toprosecute and defend an action in court.
c. A real party in interest is the one who stands to be benefited or injured by
the judgment in the suit or the one entitled to the avails thereof.
i. A plaintiff is a real party in interest when he is the one who has a
legal right to enforce or protect
1
 ii. Adefendant is a real party in interest when he is the one who has 2. Heirs of Guido Yaptinchay v. Hon. Roy del Rosario: In the said case, the
a correlative legal obligation to redress a wrong done to the petitioners therein, claiming to be the legal heirs of the late Guido and Isabel
plaintiff by reason of the defendant's act or omission which had Yaptinchay, filed for annulment of the transfer certificates of title issued in the
violated the legal right of the former. name of Golden Bay Realty Corporation on the ground that the subject properties
d. Such interest, to be considered a real interest, must be one which is rightfully belong to the petitioners' predecessor and by virtue of succession have
present and substantial, as distinguished from a mere expectancy, or a passed on to them. In affirming the trial court therein, this Court ruled then that
future, contingent, subordinate or consequential interest.Thus, a plaintiffs who claimed to be the legal heirs of the said Guido and Isabel
plaintiff's right to institute an ordinary civil action should be based on his own Yaptinchay have not shown any proof or even a semblance of it — except the
right to the relief sought. allegations that they are the legal heirs of the aforementioned Yaptinchays —
e. This Court has consistently ruled that a declaration of heirship is that they have been declared the legal heirs of the deceased couple. Now, the
improper in an ordinary civil action since the matter is "within the determination of who are the legal heirs of the deceased couple must be
exclusive competence of the court in a special proceeding". made in the proper special proceedings in court, and not in an ordinary suit
f. In the instant case, while the complaint was denominated as an action for for reconveyance of property. This must take precedence over the action
the for reconveyance.
g. "Declaration of Non-Existency[sic], Nullity of Deeds, and Cancellation of
Certificates of Title, etc., the allegations therein reveal that the right being
asserted by the respondents are their right as heirs of Anacleto Cabrera
who they claim co-owned one-half of the subject property and not merely
one-fourth as stated in the documents the respondents sought to annul.
h. Respondents herein, except for their allegations, still need to support their
claim that they are indeed the legal heirs of Anacleto and are therefore
DIGESTER:
entitled to the property in question.
i. There is nothing in the records of the case which would show that a special
proceeding wherein the respondents were declared to be legal heirs have
been instituted. There is therefore a need to establish their heirship in the
proper forum.
j. Thus, the trial court correctly dismissed the case for there is a lack of cause
of action when a case is instituted by parties who are not real parties in
interest.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition is GRANTED. The decision of the Court ofAppeals is
hereby REVERSED and the decision of the Regional Trial Court dated June 29,2000
DISMISSING the complaint is REINSTATED

OTHER NOTES
Recent cases which this case cited in its ratio:

1. Portugal v. Portugal-Beltran held that where special proceedings had been

instituted but had been finally closed and terminated, however, or if a putative
heir has lost the right to have himself declared in the special proceedings as co-
heir and he can no longer ask for its reopening, then an ordinary civil action can
be filed for his declaration as heir in order to bring about the annulment of the
partition or distribution or adjudication of a property or properties belonging to the
estate of the deceased.

Note: though in Portugal, the Court held that it would be superfluous to subject
the estate to a special proceeding since the status as heirs could be achieved in
the ordinary civil case filed, this was due to the fact that there was only one
property left by the decedent and the parties therein have already presented
evidence to establish their rights as heirs. In the case at hand however, the
respondents did not present any evidence to establish heir rights as heirs.