G.R. No. 105608 & G.R. No. 113199; April 30, 2008
TIRSO D. MONTEROSO, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, et al., respondents. / SOFIA PENDEJITO VDA. DE MONTEROSO, et al., petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and TIRSO D. MONTEROSO, respondents.

FACTS

Don Fabian Monteroso, Sr. was married twice. With his first wife, Soledad Doldol, he had four children: Soledad, Reygula, Benjamin, and Tirso. After Soledad Doldol’s death, he married Sofia Pendejito, with whom he had four more children: Florenda, Reynato, Alberto, and Fabian, Jr. During his lifetime, Don Fabian initiated intestate proceedings for his first wife’s estate (SP No. 309), resulting in a court-approved 1936 partition of properties designated as “F” parcels (acquired during the first marriage). This partition adjudicated specific shares to the children from the first marriage.
Following Don Fabian’s death in 1948, disputes arose among the heirs from both marriages regarding the ownership and partition of the “F” properties and additional “S” properties (acquired during the second marriage). The children of the deceased son Benjamin, along with other heirs from the first marriage, filed an action for recovery of possession and ownership against Tirso Monteroso, who was in possession of several parcels. Tirso claimed ownership through various deeds of sale and donations executed by his father and siblings before and after Don Fabian’s death.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the conveyances (sales and donations) of the “F” properties executed by Don Fabian after the death of his first wife, and by his heirs from the first marriage, are valid, thereby precluding the other heirs from claiming their rightful shares.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled that the conveyances were invalid with respect to the shares of the other compulsory heirs. The legal logic is anchored on the nature of co-ownership and the rules on succession. Upon the death of the first wife, Soledad Doldol, her one-half share in the conjugal “F” properties was transmitted by operation of law to her compulsory heirs: her four children and her surviving spouse, Don Fabian. The 1936 partition in SP No. 309 legally effected the division of her estate, establishing the definite shares of her children. Consequently, Don Fabian could only validly dispose of his own share in these properties. Any sale or donation he made that covered the shares already belonging to his children from the first marriage was void for being an alienation of property not belonging to him (nemo dat quod non habet).
Furthermore, the purported conveyances among the heirs themselves did not constitute a valid extrajudicial partition that could bind all parties. For a deed of extrajudicial partition to be valid and effective against all heirs, it must include all the heirs or be executed with their consent. The deeds in question did not meet this requirement, as they excluded some of the compulsory heirs. Thus, the “F” properties remained subject to co-ownership among all legitimate heirs from the first marriage. An action for partition, which is imprescriptible, was the proper remedy. The Court affirmed the need for a complete judicial partition to settle the respective shares of all heirs definitively.