GR 147928; (January, 2005) (Digest)
G.R. No. 147928 ; January 11, 2005
EMMANUEL F. CONCEPCION, et al., petitioners, vs. HEIRS OF JOSE F. CONCEPCION, et al., respondents.
FACTS
The parties are descendants of the late spouses Regino Concepcion, Sr. and Concepcion Famador. Following the death of the spouses, a will left by Concepcion Famador was probated but the proceedings were later dismissed due to the executor’s neglect. Consequently, Jose Concepcion, one of the children, filed a complaint for partition. In a 1978 decision in Civil Case No. R-13850, the court declared Jose entitled to specific shares from his parents’ estates and ordered his brothers Jesus, Regino, Jr., and Emmanuel to “contribute proportionately to the completion of plaintiff’s legitime.” This decision became final and executory.
Subsequently, due to non-satisfaction of the judgment, the same trial court issued an Order dated May 27, 1987, directing its sheriff to execute a deed of conveyance over a specific property, the Zulueta property, in favor of Jose. When Jose sought to register this deed, the Register of Deeds required the owner’s duplicate certificate of title, which was in the possession of the other heirs (petitioners). Upon their refusal to surrender it, Jose filed a petition for cancellation of title before the RTC sitting as a land registration court, which granted the petition in a 1988 Order. The Court of Appeals affirmed this order.
ISSUE
Whether the Order dated May 27, 1987, directing the conveyance of the Zulueta property, and the subsequent orders implementing it, are valid.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court granted the petition and set aside the Court of Appeals’ decision. The legal logic centers on the immutability of final judgments. The 1978 partition decision, which had long become final and executory, only ordered the defendants to “contribute proportionately” to Jose’s legitime. It did not specifically authorize the surrender or conveyance of the Zulueta property. In fact, the trial court had previously denied a motion for partition of this very property, correctly stating that to do so would amend the final decision.
The Order of May 27, 1987, which directly ordered the conveyance of the Zulueta property, effectively altered the substance of the final 1978 judgment. A final and executory judgment can no longer be amended, except for clerical errors. Therefore, the 1987 Order was a nullity. Consequently, the 1988 Order of the land registration court, which merely sought to implement the void 1987 Order, was likewise invalid. The Court emphasized that an execution order must conform to the dispositive portion of the final judgment and cannot vary or expand the rights determined therein.