GR 234429; (July, 2019) (Digest)
G.R. No. 234429 July 10, 2019
SPOUSES FELIPE PARINGIT and JOSEFA PARINGIT, Petitioners vs. MARCIANA PARINGIT BAJIT, ADOLIO PARINGIT, and ROSARIO PARINGIT ORDOÑO, Respondents
FACTS
Respondents sued petitioners for annulment of title and reconveyance of a 150-square meter family lot. The Supreme Court, in a final 2010 Decision, upheld an implied trust, ordering petitioners to reconvey the property to all five siblings (including non-party Florencio) upon respondents’ reimbursement of their shares in the purchase price. The trial court was tasked with execution.
During execution, petitioners persistently filed motions, delaying implementation for nearly nine years. They argued that only four shares existed (treating themselves as one unit), so the lot should be divided into four parts. The trial court, however, in its Orders, directed the segregation of 90 square meters for the three respondents, based on a five-way division (30 sqm per sibling). Petitioners challenged this as a variance of the Supreme Court’s final decision.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court, in ordering the segregation of 90 square meters for respondents, altered or violated the terms of the Supreme Court’s final and executory 2010 Decision.
RULING
No. The trial court did not alter the decision but correctly implemented it. The Supreme Court’s 2010 Decision explicitly recognized an implied trust in favor of all five siblings: Florencio, Felipe, Marciana, Adolio, and Rosario. The logical and mathematical execution of this ruling requires dividing the 150-square meter lot into five equal shares of 30 square meters each. Consequently, the three respondents (Marciana, Adolio, and Rosario) are collectively entitled to 90 square meters. The trial court’s orders were a precise application of this arithmetic, not a modification.
The Court condemned petitioners’ contumacious nine-year delay in execution through frivolous motions and warned against further dilatory tactics. The petition was denied, and the trial court was directed to promptly implement the 2010 Decision.