G.R. No. L-46296. September 24, 1991.
EPITACIO DELIMA, ET AL., petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, GALILEO DELIMA (deceased), substituted by his legal heirs, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

Lino Delima acquired Lot No. 7758 from the government. Upon his death in 1921, his heirs were his siblings Eulalio, Juanita, Galileo, and Vicente Delima. A title, TCT No. 2744, was issued in 1953 in the name of the “Legal Heirs of Lino Delima,” represented by Galileo. Subsequently, Galileo executed an affidavit of extra-judicial declaration of heirs. Based on this, TCT No. 2744 was cancelled, and a new title, TCT No. 3009, was issued on February 4, 1954, solely in Galileo’s name, excluding the other heirs. Galileo then possessed the lot and paid taxes from 1954 to 1965.
On February 29, 1968, the heirs of Eulalio and Juanita (petitioners) filed an action for reconveyance and/or partition against Galileo and Vicente, seeking annulment of TCT No. 3009. The trial court ruled in favor of petitioners, declaring TCT No. 3009 void and ordering partition among all heirs. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, upholding Galileo’s claim of exclusive ownership based on his payment of the balance of the purchase price and taxes, and finding the action barred.

ISSUE

Whether petitioners’ action for reconveyance and partition is already barred by prescription.

RULING

Yes, the action is barred by prescription. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals. While Article 494 of the Civil Code states that no prescription runs between co-owners or co-heirs so long as co-ownership is recognized, prescription begins to run from the moment a co-owner repudiates the co-ownership by performing unequivocal acts of adverse claim communicated to the others.
Here, Galileo’s act of securing the cancellation of the title in the heirs’ names (TCT No. 2744) and obtaining a new title solely in his name (TCT No. 3009) on February 4, 1954, constituted a clear, open, and conclusive repudiation of the co-ownership. The issuance of TCT No. 3009 was constructive notice to the world of his exclusive claim. An action for reconveyance based on an implied trust prescribes in ten years. The ten-year period commenced from February 4, 1954.
Since petitioners filed their action only on February 29, 1968, more than ten years had elapsed. Galileo’s adverse possession for over ten years vested title in him by acquisitive prescription. Consequently, the right to demand partition or reconveyance was extinguished. The petition was denied.