Entry into the land effected clandestinely without the knowledge of the other

Entry into the land effected clandestinely without

This preview shows page 117 - 119 out of 155 pages.

fell under the classification “through strategy or stealth.” Entry into the land effected clandestinely without the knowledge of the other co-owners could be categorized as possession by stealth. Moreover, respondent’s act of getting only the consent of one co-owner, her sister Norma Maligaya, and allowing the latter to stay in the constructed house, can in fact be considered as a strategy which she utilized in order to enter into the co-owned property. 6. Protest against acts of majority which are prejudicial to minority 7. Exercise legal redemption 8. Ask for partition D. Assignees of a co-owner who do not exercise the rights afforded to them by Art. 497 of the Civil Code during the partition of the property owned in common are bound by the final and executory decision of the court as regards the partition of such property. Panganiban vs. Oamil G.R. No. 14931. January 22, 2008. [542 SCRA 166 (2008)] HELD: Under a co-ownership, the ownership of an undivided thing or right belongs to different persons. During the existence of the co-ownership, no individual can claim title to any definite portion of the community property until the partition
Image of page 117
112 IBP JOURNAL Eduardo A. Labitag thereof; and prior to the partition, all that the co-owner has is an ideal or abstract quota or proportionate share in the entire land or thing. Before partition in a co- ownership, every co-owner has the absolute ownership of his undivided interest in the common property. The co-owner is free to alienate, assign, or mortgage this undivided interest, except as to purely personal rights. The effect of such transfer is limited to the portion which may be awarded to him upon partition of the property. Under Art. 497 of the Civil Code, in the event of a division or partition of property owned in common, assignees of one or more of the co-owners may take part in the division of the thing owned in common and object to its being effected without their concurrence. But they cannot impugn any partition already executed, unless there had been fraud, or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it, without prejudice to the right of the debtor or assignor to maintain its validity. E. Partition may be inferred from circumstances sufficiently strong to support the presumption. Thus, after a long possession in severalty, a deed of partition may be presumed. Quimpo, Sr. vs. Abad Vda. de Beltran G.R. No. 16095. February 13, 2008. [545 SCRA 174 (2008)] FACTS: Estaquia Perfecto-Abad was the owner of several parcels of land in Goa, Camarines Sur. When she died, her grandchildren, Joaquin Quimpo and the respondents, inherited the parcels of land. In 1966, petitioner and respondents undertook an oral partition of parcel III (San Jose Property) and parcel IV. Half of the properties were given to petitioner and the other half to the respondent. Two of the respondents occupied their respective shares in the San Jose property and installed their tenants over their share in parcel IV. Joaquin, on the other hand, became the administrator of the remaining undivided properties and of the shares of respondents Danilo, Marites, Anita and Helen, who were still minors at that time. In 1989 Danilo,
Image of page 118
Image of page 119

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture