G.R. No. L-7464; October 24, 1955
Mercedes Castro, Exequiel Castro, Mariano G. Sison and Gerardo S. Sison, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. Luis Castro, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The property originally belonged to Francisco Castro. In 1921, his estate was settled, awarding the land pro-indiviso to his children: Mercedes and Vicente (4.5/14 each), and Exequiel, Emiliano, Luis, Ildefonso, and Antonio (1/14 each). Vicente Castro died around 1938. In the intestate proceedings for Vicente’s estate, the property was adjudicated in August 1939 to: (a) Maura Repato, Vicente’s widow (7/14); (b) Exequiel, Luis, Emiliano, Ildefonso, and Antonio, Vicente’s brothers (1/14 each); and (c) Mercedes Castro (2/14). Subsequently, Exequiel and Luis purchased shares from Emiliano and inherited from Ildefonso and Antonio, resulting in ownership as of March 1944 by: Maura Repato (7/14), Mercedes Castro (3/14), Exequiel Castro (2.5/14), and Luis Castro (1.5/14). On March 31, 1944, Maura Repato sold her 7/14 share to Mariano G. Sison and Gerardo S. Sison, and the deed was registered on April 1, 1944. Luis Castro learned of the sale around May 15, 1944, and immediately offered to repurchase the share, but the Sisons refused. The plaintiffs (Mercedes, Exequiel, and the Sisons) sued for actual partition. Luis Castro resisted and, via counterclaim, asserted a right to repurchase from the Sisons under Article 1067 of the Civil Code, arguing he was a co-heir. The trial court sustained the plaintiffs, dismissed the counterclaim, and approved the partition. Luis Castro appealed solely from the dismissal of his counterclaim.

ISSUE

Whether Luis Castro, as a co-heir, has the right to repurchase the share sold by Maura Repato to the Sisons under Article 1067 of the Civil Code, or whether the sale is governed by the legal redemption rights of co-owners under Articles 1522 and 1524 of the Civil Code.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment, ruling that Article 1067 does not apply. The Court held that Article 1067 applies only when a co-heir sells hereditary rights to a stranger before partition. Here, there was already a partition or adjudication of specific shares in Vicente Castro’s estate in August 1939, which fixed the portions of the owners. Consequently, the abstract hereditary rights became determinate, and the parties ceased to be co-heirs and became co-owners. Therefore, the sale by Maura Repato was a sale by a co-owner, governed by Articles 1522 and 1524 of the Civil Code, which prescribe a nine-day redemption period from the date of registration of the sale. Since Luis Castro’s offer was made after May 15, 1944, well beyond the nine days from the April 1, 1944 registration, his right had expired. Additionally, the Court noted that Luis Castro was not strictly a co-heir of Maura Repato regarding Francisco Castro’s estate (as she was not Francisco’s heir) nor regarding Vicente Castro’s estate (as Luis inherited nothing new from Vicente; he received the same 1/14 share he already owned from his father). Thus, the counterclaim was properly dismissed.