G.R. No. L-23374 September 30, 1970
TEOFILA FELICES, plaintiff-appellant, vs. FRANCISCO COLEGADO, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Felipe Felices died on November 5, 1938, leaving a homestead covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 73. Soon after his death, his five surviving children, including Teofila Felices (plaintiff-appellant) and Maria Felices, physically partitioned the homestead among themselves, each taking exclusive possession of a specific portion, although no separate transfer certificates of title were issued. On February 24, 1949, Maria Felices sold her distinct, bounded share to Roman Iriola under a pacto de retro. In 1951, Silverio, Pedro, Marta, and Maria Felices agreed to sell their respective shares absolutely to Francisco Colegado (defendant-appellee). As Maria’s share was still with Iriola, Colegado advanced the repurchase price. When Iriola refused repurchase, the Felices siblings consigned the money and filed a case (Civil Case No. 1991) to compel repurchase, joining Teofila as a defendant for her refusal to participate. On September 11, 1953, Maria, Marta, Silverio, and Pedro executed a deed of absolute sale of their shares to Colegado. On June 19, 1954, the court ordered Iriola to allow repurchase, affirmed on appeal. On August 21, 1962, Colegado paid Iriola’s heirs and obtained possession. On September 7, 1962, Teofila Felices offered to redeem Maria’s share from Colegado for P2,053.61, which Colegado refused. Teofila then filed the present action (Civil Case No. 5510), asserting a co-owner’s right of legal redemption under Article 1620 of the Civil Code. Colegado countered that Teofila had no right to redeem, citing Article 1088 and arguing that partition had terminated co-ownership.

ISSUE

Whether or not, under the stipulated facts, plaintiff-appellant Teofila Felices can exercise the right of legal redemption over the land sold by her sister Maria Felices to defendant-appellee Francisco Colegado, pursuant to Article 1620 and/or Article 1088 of the Civil Code.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision dismissing the complaint.
1. Article 1088 of the Civil Code, governing redemption among co-heirs, is inapplicable because it applies only when a hereditary right is sold before partition. Here, the physical partition of the homestead occurred immediately after Felipe Felices’s death in 1938, long before the sales in question.
2. Article 1620 of the Civil Code, governing redemption among co-owners, is also inapplicable. Co-ownership requires an undivided thing or right. The immediate physical partition among the heirs, with each taking exclusive possession and control of a specific, bounded portion, terminated the co-ownership over the homestead as a whole. Consequently, when Maria Felices sold her distinct share, Teofila was no longer a co-owner of that specific property and thus had no right of redemption under Article 1620.
3. Even assuming co-ownership persisted, Teofila still could not redeem. By the time Colegado paid for and acquired Maria’s share in August 1962, he had already purchased the shares of the other siblings in 1953, making him a co-owner of the homestead. A right of legal redemption under Article 1620 does not exist between co-owners; it applies only when a share is sold to a third person or stranger. Since Colegado was already a co-owner when he acquired Maria’s share, Teofila, as his co-owner, could not redeem from him.