JANUARY 17 - JANUARY 23, 2021 16 DUMAGUETE....FROM P. 3


life,” said William Fitzsimmons, Harvard dean for Admission & Financial Aid, in a letter to the Antonio boys. The total acceptance rate of freshmen for the Class of 2025 was only four percent, the lowest college acceptance rate among all universities in the US.


“I have seen the strengths and weaknesses of public service. I saw the inability of government to provide adequate healthcare in the Philippines for hemophiliacs like me and my twin brother, and what having adequate medicine here in the US meant. These experiences have shaped my interest in civic engagement and public leadership, and a deep commitment to giving back,” Miggy told the MetroPost. Miggy graduated with Distinction from the Boston Latin School. He was director for Civic Engagement of the Boston Mayor’s Youth Council, and northeast director of Expansion of the Junior State of America Foundation which he founded. He was awarded the Babbitt Public Service Fellowship for a summer internship program, and was accepted into the National Honors Society for his GPA above 3.7. He was best speaker in the 2019 debate of the Junior State of America Fall State Convention, and summa cum laude in the National Latin Exam given from 2016 to 2018. He was a rower of the Boston Latin School varsity crew team which won the Massachusetts rowing championships.


through FB Messenger. “For me, this shows their commitment to students like me who have the fervor to make a positive impact in the communities, especially the marginalized and under- represented. My twin brother and I remain truly grateful, and are committed to paying this opportunity forward. I hope this can inspire other young Filipino students to leave no stone unturned in submitting their applications forward. It is possible only if we have the courage to try,” he added. Marcky earned the highest distinction for all quarters at the Boston Latin School from 2016 to 2020, and is a member of the National Honors Society. In high school, he was a clinical research intern for the Rare Genomes Project at the Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard. He was also team captain for All Weapons of the Boston Latin School varsity fencing, and qualified for the US Fencing Junior Olympics in 2018 and 2019.


“Coming from a family of modest means, attending Harvard would have been almost unreachable, even impossible, had it not been for its generous financial aid package. In fact, the first sentence in their acceptance booklet reads ‘YOU CAN AFFORD HARVARD.’ And they really mean it,” Marcky told the MetroPost


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF NEGROS ORIENTAL 7th Judicial Region


Branch 42 Dumaguete City


George L. Uymatiao, Plaintiff -versus-


Annabelle Uy-Tuballa and spouse, Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca, and Conchita Uy- Serrantes and spouse, Defendants x---------------------------------------------------/


Civil Case No. 2018-15330


For: Partition, Accounting, and Damages


DECISION


The subject of this case is Lot No. 1270-A, registered in the name of Josefina Barredo, married to Quintin Uy, under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 19053


Plaintiff filed this suit to seek the partition of a lot owned in common by the parties. Summons were served personally to Defendants Annabelle Uy-Tuballa and Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca, while Defendant Conchita Uy-Serrantes, whose whereabouts/ address are unknown, was served Summons by way of publication. Only Defendants Annabelle Uy-Tuballa and Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca filed their Answer, while Defendant Conchita Uy-Serrantes was declared in default1 As per Pre-Trial Order2


, the following facts were admitted: upon motion by the Plaintiff.


containing an area of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY-ONE (151) square meters, more or less, and situated in Barangay Poblacion 1, Dumaguete City. The same lot is declared in the name of Josefina Barredo under Tax Declaration No. 14-0001-000234


their marriage, spouses Josefina Barredo and Quintin Uy begot five children, namely: Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, Mary Ann Uy, Conchita Uy-Serrantes, who are defendants in this case; Wenceslao Uy, and Quintin Ceasar Uy Jr. who died on July 25, 2010, and survived by his wife, Bella Uy, and daughter, Daphne Uy. On Oct. 23, 2016, Josefina Barredo died while her husband Quintin Uy predeceased her on Oct. 26, 2000. Meanwhile, Wenceslao Uy and the heirs of Quintin Ceasar Uy Jr. have sold their 2/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A in favour of the Plaintiff on March 20, 2017 as per Deed of Sale5


. EVIDENCE OF THE PLAINTIFF


Lot No. 1270-A and its improvements. Said mortgage is annotated in the Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1905 covering Lot No. 1270-A. Three months after extending the loan, Josefina Barredo went back to the Plaintiff


Two-million-peso (P2,000,000.00) -loan from him, payable in one year, explaining that she needed the amount to pay-off her loan with a lending company, and to buy her medicines. To secure the loan, Josefina Barredo executed a Deed of Mortgage6


over


and offered to sell Lot No. 1270-A. While at first Plaintiff was not interested in the property, as it was too small and subject to set-back requirements which limit its utility, he was, however, later convinced to acquire it after learning that the property behind it was also for sale. So Plaintiff agreed to buy the property for four million pesos (P4,000,000.00) or at P26,500.00 per square meter. When Plaintiff visited Atty. Edmund Dy, lawyer of Josefina Barredo, he was


According to the Plaintiff, on Dec. 11, 2014, Josefina Barredo-Uy obtained a . During , Under a claim of co-ownership to the extent of 9/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A, Republic of the Philippines


which she believed and claimed to have been fraudulently-executed. However, due to the untimely demise of Josefina Barredo, this case was dismissed. According to Atty. Dy, he was aware that Josefina Barredo sold her rights and interest over Lot No. 1270-A to Mr. George L. Uymatiao for P2,340,000.00. The interest of Josefina Barredo consisted of her one-half (1/2) conjugal share plus an additional one- twelfth (1/12) share as heir of her husband, who predeceased her. In total, this share can be translated as 7/12 share over the 151 square-meter area of Lot No. 1270-A. He also recalled that Josefina Barredo wanted to sell the entire property for P4,000,000.00, claiming it as her paraphernal property, but Mr. Uymatiao refused, as he could not be assured that the lot is indeed her paraphernal property. For this reason, it was agreed that Mr. Uymatiao will only buy first the one-half (1/2) conjugal share plus one-twelfth (1/12) share as heir of her husband, over Lot No. 1270-A, or a total of 7/12 share. The P2,340,000.00 purchase price for the 7/12 share of Josefina Barredo over Lot No. 1270-A was determined by multiplying the 7/12 with the agreed purchase price of the entire Lot No. 1270-A of P4,000,000.00. This is what was agreed upon, and subject of the Memorandum of Agreement he prepared and notarized.13


of Sale12


The remaining balance of P1,660,000.00 was supposed to be paid to Josefina Barredo after the case she filed against her children will be resolved. The phrase in the Memorandum of Agreement that “That the SECOND PARTY has


Dy also recalled that as early as May 2014, the late Josefina Barredo already sought his advice, as she wanted to sell her rights and interest over Lot No. 1270-A, and for which reason he prepared the Notices15


prepared and notarized the Extrajudicial Settlement and Confirmation of Sale and Sale16 executed by Wenceslao Uy and the Heirs of Ceasar Quintin Uy Jr. over their 2/12 share in Lot No. 1270-A with improvements, after serving Notice17


During his testimony, Atty. Dy also mentioned that on March 30, 2017, he also


this same document, Wenceslao Uy and the Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr. confirmed and affirmed the Sale made by Josefina Barredo-Uy of her 7/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A with improvements, in favour of George L. Uymatiao.


EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENDANTS


surprised to learn that Josefina Barredo was filing a case against her children because the Tax Declaration over the building constructed on Lot No. 1270-A was already transferred to them by virtue of a Deed of Sale purportedly executed by her. Josefina Barredo maintained that Lot 1270-A is her paraphernal property which her aunt held in trust for her during her minority, and which was returned to her by way of a Deed of Sale, with no payment of money involved. The case was later filed by Josefina Barredo against her children, and docketed as 2015-15041 at RTC Branch 32 of Dumaguete City, which was dismissed upon the demise of Josefina Barredo on Oct. 23, 2016. During the conference with Atty. Edmund Dy, and upon his advice, Josefina Barredo and the Plaintiff executed a document entitled Memorandum of Agreement7 dated and notarized on Dec. 11, 2015, referring to Plaintiff as the Second Party, and Josefina Uy as the First Party, and stating among others that: -Whereas, the FIRST PARTY is an owner of a lot together with the building constructed thereon identified as Lot No. 1270-A, with an area of 151 square meters, located at Sta. Catalina St., Dumaguete City; -That the FIRST PARTY has sold the above-described parcel of land, together with the building constructed thereon, to the SECOND PARTY at a purchase price of FOUR MILLION PESOS (P4,000,000.00); -That the SECOND PARTY has already paid the amount of P2,340,000.00 as advance payment including interest up to March 2015; -That the parties agreed that starting March 2015, no more interest shall be imposed by the SECOND PARTY;


Plaintiff also explained that the payment of the purchase price he made in the total amount of P2,340,000.00 included the amount representing two months interest that Josefina owed him for the loan he extended earlier, and he also shelled another P100,000.00 to her for her to pay her lawyer, and other legal expenses for the case she filed. Apart from the two months interest, he did not collect any other interest charges on the loan. Plaintiff also narrated that when he suggested to Atty. Dy to just make a Deed of


and notarized the Memorandum of Agreement between Plaintiff and Josefina Barredo, also testified. He narrated that the late Josefina Barredo maintained that Lot No. 1270- A is her paraphernal property, having inherited it from her parents. The case Josefina Barredo filed against her children was for the purpose of recovering the ownership of the building constructed on Lot 1270-A which was transferred and declared in the names of her children under Tax Declaration No. 14-0001-00595,11


pursuant to a Deed


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9


Court Order dated Feb. 27, 2020, Record p. 484 Record, pp. 223-230 Exhibit “A” Exhibit “B” Record, p. 72 Exhibit “K” Exhibit “R”


10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17


TSN, May 26, 2020, pp. 5-6, 12 TSN, May 26, 2020, p. 10


TSN, May 26, 2020, pp. 14-15 Exhibit “F” Exhibit “E”


Judicial Affidavit of Atty. Edmund F. Dy, Q&A Nos. 14-18 Judicial Affidavit of Atty. Edmund F. Dy, Q&A No. 19 Exhibits “L” to “O” Exhibit “V”


Exhibits “S” and “T”


During his re-direct, Plaintiff further explained that of the total purchase price for Lot No. 1270-A, the amount of P2,340,000.00 represents 7/12 share of Lot No. 1270-A which he acquired by purchase from Josefina Barredo. The remaining 5/12 share cover the share of the five children of Josefina Barredo which is valued at about P1,650,000, which he was supposed to pay Josefina Barredo should she be successful in the case she filed.10 Atty. Edmund Dy, former lawyer of Josefina Barredo and the lawyer who prepared


the lawyer of Josefina Barredo that the amount of P2,340,000.00 he paid to Josefina Barredo covered the latter’s share of 58.3 percent over Lot No. 1270-A9


Sale, the latter explained to him that the Memorandum of Agreement already partook of a Deed of Sale covering the conjugal share of Josefina Barredo over Lot 1270-A, and that the reference of the amount of P4,000,000.00 is just to have a basis for payment of the balance, in case Josefina Barredo wins the case against her children to have Lot 1270-A declared as her paraphernal property.8


Plaintiff was able to confirm with .


-That the balance of the purchase price in the amount of P1,660,000.00 shall be paid after the court case is resolved.


Notice coming from her mother, Josefina Barredo-Uy, of her intention to sell her properties, however, after agreeing to sell at a right price, she no longer heard from her mother. She also testified that she only came to know about the alleged sale of her mother’s share over Lot No. 1270-A in favour of the Plaintiff when they met at a conference before the office of the Barangay Captain of Tinago. She surmised that her mother may have been made to sign that Memorandum of Agreement20


for P5,000,000.00 or roughly at P35,000.00 per square meter, the agreement with the Plaintiff was for a very much lower amount of P4,000,000.00. While Defendant Annabelle Uy-Tuballa was first hesitant to admit that she knew that her mother sold her share to the Plaintiff, she was able to admit it after she was confronted with a letter dated June 5, 201723


the documents signed by their mother, Josefina Barredo-Uy, and the answer25 from Atty. Edmund Dy, their reply24


Edmund Dy, furnishing them copies of the documents signed by their mother and their siblings Wenceslao Uy and Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr., selling their shares over Lot 1270-A to the Plaintiff.26


to her half conjugal share over Lot No. 1270-A, plus another share as heir of Quintin Uy Sr., or a total of 7/12 share. She also admitted that she and her four siblings are entitled to 1/12 share each.


RULING OF THE COURT


Transfer Certificate of Title No.1905 is a conjugal property between spouses Quintin Uy and Josefina Barredo-Uy. This conclusion is supported by the Torrens title itself, and also from the previous Torrens titles covering Lot 1270-A, indicating that the land was acquired by the spouses Quintin Uy and Josefina Barredo-Uy by purchase during the existence of their marriage. Moreover, Art. 116 of the Family Code, which applies in this case, provides that all properties acquired during the marriage is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership unless it is proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife. Thus, after the death of Quintin Uy Sr., Lot No. 1270-A became the common property


of his surviving spouse, Josefina Barredo-Uy and their five children -- Annabelle Uy- Tuballa, Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca, Conchita Uy-Serrantes, Wenceslao Uy, and Quintin Cesar Uy Jr., who is survived by his wife and their daughter. Having established the conjugal character of the property, the next issue would be


whether or not Josefina Barredo-Uy can sell her 7/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A even without the consent of her children as co-heirs/co-owners. Now as to the extent of the ownership of Josefina Barredo-Uy over Lot No. 1270-A,


considering that the property was conjugal, upon the death of Quintin Uy, the one-half share of the property automatically becomes the property of Josefina Barredo-Uy as her share in the conjugal partnership which was dissolved by the death of her spouse. Upon the death of Quintin Uy, his half share over the conjugal property was transmitted to his heirs which included his widow, Josefina Barredo-Uy, and their five children -- Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca, Conchita Uy-Serrantes, Wenceslao Uy, and the Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr., resulting in their co-ownership of the property. Thus, the total share of Josefina Barredo-Uy over Lot No. 1270-A is 6/12 as her conjugal share plus 1/12 as heir of Quintin Uy, or a total of 7/12 share. Pursuant to Art. 777 of the Civil Code, the rights to the succession are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent. Therefore, at this precise time, the heirs of the decedent are already considered to have acquired ownership of his/her share in the inheritance, and not at the time of declaration of heirs, partition, or distribution. Thus, there is no legal impediment to an heir disposing of his/her hereditary share immediately after such death.27


conjugal share and 1/12 share as an heir. Defendant Annabelle Uy-Tuballa claimed of a possible deception in the transaction


18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27


Exhibits “2” and “3”


Answer, paragraphs s and v Exhibit “1”


Applied to this case, Josefina Barredo-Uy can legally dispose of her 6/12 From the evidences presented, there is no question that Lot No. 1270-A covered by In the course of her examination, Defendant also admitted that her mother is entitled


requesting copy of from Atty.


her mother, Josefina Barredo-Uy, and the Plaintiff, considering that contrary to what their mother said in the Notice of Sale22


It is her belief that there was an element of deception in the transaction between they received that she was selling the common property


as her mother, Josefina Barredo-Uy, was unschooled.21


late Quintin Uy Sr and Josefina Barredo-Uy. In support of this claim, Defendant Annabelle Uy-Tuballa presented the marriage contract of her parents, and the certificates of title18 preceding Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1905 covering Lot No. 1270-A, showing that it was acquired by her parents during their marriage. In their Answer, Defendants maintain that the alleged sate between the Plaintiff and their mother, Josefina Barredo-Uy, was not consummated, and neither was there any delivery of the share of Josefina Barredo-Uy to the Plaintiff; thus, Plaintiff is not a co-owner of Lot No. 1270-A, and therefore, not entitled to ask for a partition.19 In the testimony of Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, while admitting to having received the


Defendants maintain that Lot No. 1270-A is the conjugal property of their parents, the to the other siblings. In to the other co-owners. Atty.


already paid the amount of P2,340,000.00 as advance payment including interest up to March 2015” was also explained by Atty. Dy. He said that prior to the actual sale, Mr. Uymatiao extended a loan to Josefina Barredo in the amount of P2,000,000.00 so she can pay off her loan to a lending firm. The interest due of the loan up to March 2015 was included; however, interest charges from March 2015 to Dec. 15 were all waived.14


The increase in the number of applicants was attributed to a revolutionary financial aid program “unlike the world has ever seen” during the pandemic-related global recession, a heightened online recruitment efforts for international students, and the University’s decision to make standardized tests optional. The annual cost of study at Harvard is $75,000 (P3.7 million) or $300,000 (about P15 million) for four years.


Miggy and Marcky are the sons of Jojo and Myrish Cadapan- Antonio who migrated to the US in 2014 when they were 10 and in fifth grade at the Silliman Elementary School. Their mother, Dumaguete City councilor for seven years until 2007, had to be at the Harvard Kennedy School that time for graduate study.


Marcky and Miggy Antonio years back at Silliman.


between the Plaintiff and their mother Josefina Barredo-Uy, claiming that her mother finished only Grade 2. However, Defendants failed to prove this allegation. Moreover, the Memorandum of Agreement was a notarized document. Jurisprudence holds that a public document executed and attested through the intervention of a Notary Public is evidence of the facts in a clear, unequivocal manner therein expressed. Otherwise stated, public and notarial documents, or those instruments duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by law, may be presented in evidence without further proof, the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the instrument or document.28


Uy who assisted her at that time, and who prepared and notarized the document, also testified that it was the decision of Josefina Barredo-Uy to sell her share over Lot No. 1270-A to the Plaintiff. For these reasons, the Court upholds the validity of the Memorandum of Agreement between the Plaintiff and Josefina Barredo-Uy selling her share over Lot No. 1270-A in favour of the Plaintiff. As a result of the sale, Plaintiff becomes a co-owner to the extent of 7/12 share covering the interest of Josefina Barredo-Uy and as co-owner, he is entitled to seek partition. Now, can the Memorandum of Agreement be considered a Deed of Sale to be the


source of right by the Plaintiff? The Civil Code defines what is a Contract of Sale. Thus:


consent, requiring only the consent or meeting of the minds, for the seller to transfer ownership of a certain thing to the buyer, in exchange for a price certain in money or its equivalent. Examining the terms of the Memorandum of Agreement, Josefina Barredo- Uy transferred ownership of her Lot No. 1270-A with improvements thereon in favour of the Plaintiff, in consideration of the amount of P2,340,000.00. Evidence disclosed, consisting of the testimony of her lawyer, Atty. Edmund F. Dy, that Josefina Barredo-Uy sold her one-half conjugal share or 6/12 share plus her 1/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A, which she owned at the time she sold it, and that the price for her total of 7/12 share was already paid for by the Plaintiff. The sale of the remaining 5/12 share was subject to a condition that she will be able to recover Lot No. 1270-A from her children, in a case she filed against them, as she maintained that it was her paraphernal property. Being a sale of undivided shares, Defendants could have had the right of redemption


in their favour. However, they also failed to exercise the same upon receiving a copy of the Memorandum of Agreement between Plaintiff and Josefina Barredo-Uy within the period of 30 days from receipt of notice, provided in Ar. 1623 of the New Civil Code. The letter of Atty. Edmund F. Dy informing the Defendants of the sale, as well as furnishing them a copy of the Memorandum of Agreement, is tantamount to the Notice contemplated under Art. 1623 of the New Civil Code. While this Court upholds the sale of 7/12 share over Lot No. 1270-A in favour


of the Plaintiff, however, the building standing thereon, is a different matter. The Tax Declaration of the said building was transferred in the name of the five children of Josefina Barredo-Uy and Quintin Uy. While there was a civil case filed by the late Josefina Barredo-Uy against her children, claiming that the Deed of Sale was spurious, yet the case was dismissed because of her untimely death. Hence, the Court cannot uphold including the sale of the building as at that time, it did not belong to the seller, Josefina Barredo-Uy. Nevertheless, as admitted by the parties, two of the children of Josefina Barredo-Uy


and Quintin Uy, namely: Wenceslao Uy and the Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr. have sold their shares over Lot No. 1270-A, including the improvements built thereon, making the Plaintiff a co-owner of the building to the extent of two-fifths (2/5) share. As to the land Lot No. 1270-A, Plaintiff is now a co-owner to the extent of nine-twelfths (9/12) share, having legally acquired the one-half (1/2) conjugal share of Josefina Barredo-Uy or translated as 6/12 share plus her one-twelfth share as heir of Quintin Uy, the 1/12 share of Wenceslao Uy, and the 1/12 share of the Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr., making a total of nine-twelfths (9/12) share over Lot No. 1270-A covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1905.


No. 1270-A and its improvements, Plaintiff is entitled to ask for a partition of the common property.


Having established the co-ownership between Plaintiff and Defendants over Lot


1270-A pertaining to the Defendants may overlap the 9/12 share of the Plaintiff over the land. While Art. 448 of the Civil Code is not directly applicable to the set of facts in this case, however, for purposes of determining indemnity, the same may be applied by analogy, inasmuch as the primary intent of Art. 448 is also to avoid a state of forced co-ownership, just as what was held in the cases of Pecson vs. Court of Appeals29 Coleongco vs. Regalado30


land, has the option to either: 1) appropriate the portion of the building affected upon payment of useful and necessary expenses in accordance with Art. 546 of the Civil Code and luxurious expenses under Art. 548; or 2) compel Defendants to buy the land to the extent of where their 3/5 portion of the building stands. As to the prayer for moral damages, attorney’s fees, and reimbursement for the


cost of this suit, the Court denies the same as there was no evidence to support its entitlement. Likewise, the counterclaims of Defendants are also denied for lack of basis. WHEREFORE, the Court hereby upholds the validity of sale of the seven-


twelfths (7/12) share of Josefina Barredo-Uy over Lot No. 1270-A covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1905 in favour of Plaintiff George L. Matiao, embodied in the Memorandum of Agreement dated Dec. 11, 2015 and notarized by Atty. Edmund F. Dy. The Court also recognizes the sale of the shares of Wenceslao Uy and the Heirs of Quintin Cesar Uy Jr. over their two-twelfths (2/12) undivided share over Lot No. 1270- A, and their two-fifths (2/5) share over the building constructed on Lot No. 1270-A covered under T.D. No. 93-001-0750. Thus in total, Plaintiff is now the co-owner of Lot No. 1270-A to the extent of nine-


twelfths (9/12) undivided share, and two-fifths undivided (2/5) share over the building covered by T.D. No. 93-001-0750. As co-owner of a thing owned in common, Plaintiff is entitled to a partition.


The shares of the parties are as follows: For Lot No. 1270-A covered by TCT No. 1905: 1/12 share each for Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca, and Conchita Serrantes


9/12 share for George L. Uymatiao For the building on Lot No. 1270-A covered by T.D No. 93-001-0750 1/5 share each for Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, Mary Ann Uy-Cimafranca and Conchita Serrantes


. Thus under Art. 448, the Plaintiff, as owner of 9/12 of the and The Court is not unmindful that the 3/5 portion of the building built on Lot No. By its very nature, it is a consensual contract because it is perfected by mere


Art. 1458. By the Contract of Sale, one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of and to deliver a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefor a price certain in money or its equivalent.


Lastly, Atty. Edmund F. Dy, lawyer of Josefina Barredo-


METROPOST


Judicial Affidavit of Annabelle Uy-Tuballa, Q&A Nos. 6-9 Exhibit “L” Exhibit “W” Exhibit “X” Exhibit “Y”


150-B Phil 486, 497-498 (1972) 28


30 92 Phil 387 (1952)


Spouses Isidro Saltico & ConradaSaltico versus Heirs of Resurreccion Martinez, et al., G.R. No 240199, April 10, 2019, citing Ruben F. Balane, Jottings and Jurisprudence in Civil Law (Succession) 27 (2016 Edition) and Testate Estate of JosefaTangco versus TasianaVde de Borja,


citing Spouses Alfarero et al., versus Spouses Sevilla, et al., G.R. No. 142974, Sept. 22, 2003 29


FlordelizaCalpatura Flora, et al., versus Roberto Prado, et al., G.R. No. 156879, Jan. 20, 2004, G.R. No. 115814, May 26, 1995


TSN, June 29, 2020, pp. 15-16


this Decision a project partition of the Lot No. 1270-A with improvements thereon. Should the parties fail to come up with an agreement, this Court will proceed with the appointment of three commissioners in accordance with Sec. 3 of Rule 69 of the Rules of Court. The fees for the three commissioners shall be equally divided among the four parties. Furthermore, in the actual partition of the building, and in the event of an overlap by Defendants’ share over the share of the Plaintiff over the land, parties are directed to observe Art. 448 in relation to Art. 546 and 548 of the Civil Code. Claims for damages and counterclaims are dismissed. SO ORDERED. DONE this 6th day of November, 2020 at Dumaguete City,


Philippines.


(Sgd.) Marie Rose G. Inocando-Paras Judge


MetroPost 2021 January 24 • January 31 • February 7


2/5 share for George L. Uymatiao The parties are directed to submit to this Court, within 15 days from receipt of


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18