G.R. No. 142977 September 30, 2008
LEONOR CAMCAM, JOSE, FORTUNATO, VIRGINIA, GLORIA, FLORENDO, DELFIN, RODRIGO, LEUTERIO, NARCISO, ONOFRE, ZENAIDA, AURELIA, TEOFILA, FELICIDAD, MERCEDES, LYDIA, ALFREDO, BIENVENIDO, EFREN, LILIA, ERLINDA, MELINDA, MARYLOU, MERIAM, all surnamed SALVADOR, Petitioners, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS AND ARCADIO FRIAS, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Leonor Camcam and her husband Laureano Salvador were the registered owners of two parcels of land, Lot Nos. 19554 and 18738. Laureano died intestate on December 9, 1941, survived by his wife Leonor, his brothers Agapito, Jose, and Fortunato, and the heirs of his deceased brother Luis. In 1983, Leonor and the other heirs filed a complaint against respondent Arcadio Frias for annulment of three documents executed by Leonor in favor of Frias covering the lots: a Deed of Adjudication with Sale (Nov. 4, 1982), a Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition and Sale (Nov. 4, 1982), and a Deed of Absolute Sale (Nov. 23, 1982). Petitioners alleged Frias deceived Leonor into signing the documents, which did not reflect a true sale with right to repurchase and which conveyed the shares of her co-heirs without their knowledge. Frias claimed Leonor inherited the lots exclusively under the old Civil Code and that the documents were valid, with the third document prepared to reflect the true consideration for tax purposes. The trial court declared the sales valid only with respect to Leonor’s conjugal share (one-half) and ordered the other half to be divided among Laureano’s brothers, sisters, nephews, and nieces by intestate succession. The Court of Appeals affirmed with modification, declaring one-half of the properties validly sold to Frias and the other half to be divided among the brothers (per capita) and nephews/nieces (per stirpes) of Laureano.

ISSUE

1. Whether the three deeds of sale should be declared null and void due to irregularities in their execution.
2. Whether the sales were illegal because the other petitioners, as co-owners, had a preferential right to purchase the half portion.

RULING

The Supreme Court DENIED the petition and AFFIRMED the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held:
1. The deeds of sale were not null and void. The physical appearance and alleged irregularities (identical notarial details for two documents) did not invalidate them. Notarial details are merely circumstantial evidence of execution, and the notary public testified to their due execution. Leonor, who was literate, signed the documents, and her claim of being deceived was not credible. The deeds were valid contracts of sale.
2. The sales were not illegal for violating a right of legal redemption. The property was not held in common at the time of sale. Upon Laureano’s death in 1941, the property was partitioned by operation of law. Leonor became the owner of her conjugal half, and the heirs became co-owners of the other half. Leonor validly sold only her own half share to Frias. She could not sell the shares of her co-heirs, and the deeds were void only as to those shares. The other heirs’ preferential right under Article 1620 of the Civil Code applies only to sales by a co-owner of specific, physically determinate portions of the property, which was not the case here. The sales did not trigger a right of legal redemption.