G.R. No. 29541 . January 27, 1989.
CARLOS GABILA, plaintiff-appellant, vs. PABLO PEREZ, RAMON PEREZ & MERCEDES PEREZ, defendants-appellees.

FACTS

On September 16, 1948, defendants-appellees Pablo, Ramon, and Mercedes Perez executed a Deed of Sale in favor of plaintiff-appellant Carlos Gabila, covering a parcel of land they inherited from their deceased father, Mariano Perez, and registered under TCT No. 899. The deed stipulated a purchase price of P2,500, with P1,500 paid upon signing and the balance in ten monthly installments. A crucial covenant required the vendors to “execute immediately an Extra-Judicial Partition of all the properties of their deceased father, and pay the corresponding estate and inheritance taxes” to facilitate the cancellation of the old title and the issuance of a new one in Gabila’s name. Gabila paid the full price and was given possession, but the Perez siblings failed to execute the promised partition or settle the estate taxes.
Gabila filed a complaint to compel the defendants to execute the extrajudicial partition and pay the necessary taxes. The defendants, in their Answer, raised defenses including the alleged minority of Mercedes Perez and that the deed was merely a loan guarantee. After the defendants failed to appear at trial, the court heard evidence ex parte. The trial court dismissed the complaint, reasoning that the defendants could no longer partition the specific land because they had already sold it, and the other properties of the estate were not identified in the complaint.

ISSUE

Whether the defendants can be compelled to execute an extrajudicial partition as stipulated in the deed of sale to facilitate the transfer of title to the plaintiff.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision. The legal logic centered on the nature of co-ownership and the legal effect of the deed of sale itself. Upon the death of Mariano Perez, his heirs (the defendants) immediately became co-owners of the property by operation of law. Their subsequent sale of the entire property to Gabila effectively terminated their co-ownership over it, as the purpose of partition—to divide a thing held in common—was rendered moot by the sale of the whole.
The Court held that the specific covenant to execute an extrajudicial partition was superfluous. The deed of sale itself, containing the vendors’ declaration that they are the legitimate children and heirs of Mariano Perez and that they inherited the land, functionally served as an affidavit of adjudication. This adjudication was sufficient for the purpose of transferring title. Therefore, the defendants’ obligation was not to execute a separate partition, but to surrender the owner’s duplicate of TCT No. 899 and pay any unpaid estate taxes. The Register of Deeds was ordered to cancel the old title and issue a new one in Gabila’s name upon presentation and registration of the 1948 Deed of Sale, subject to a lien in favor of any deprived heirs under Rule 74.