In this relation, Section 1, Rule 69 of the Rules of Courtprovides:LawlibraryofCRAlawSection 1. Complaint in action for partition of real estate.— A person having theright to compel the partition of real estate may do so as provided in thisRule, setting forth in his complaint the nature and extent of his title and anadequate description of the real estate of which partition is demanded andjoining as defendants all other persons interested in the property.28As can be gleaned from the foregoing provisions, the allegations of respondentsin their complaint are but customary, in fact, mandatory, to a complaint forpartition of real estate.Particularly, the complaint alleged: (1) that Pedro diedintestate; (2) that respondents, together with their co-heirs, are all of legal age,with the exception of one who is represented by a judicial representative dulyauthorized for the purpose; (3) that the heirs enumerated are the only knownheirs of Pedro; (4) that there is an account and description of all real propertiesleft by Pedro; (5) that Pedro's estate has no known indebtedness; and (6) that
respondents, as rightful heirs to the decedent's estate, pray for the partition of thesame in accordance with the laws of intestacy. It is clear, therefore, that basedon the allegations of the complaint, the case is one for judicial partition.That the complaint alleged causes of action identifying the heirs of thedecedent, properties of the estate, and their rights thereto, does notperforcemakeitanactionforsettlementofestate.In this case, it was expressly alleged in the complaint, and was not disputed, thatPedro died without a will, leaving his estate without any pending obligations.Thus, contrary to petitioner'.s contention, respondents were under no legalobligation to submit me subject properties of the estate to a special proceedingfor settlement of intestate estate, and are, in fact, encouraged to have the samepartitioned, judicially or extrajudicially, Thus, respondents committed no error in filing an action for judicialpartition instead of a special proceeding for the settlement of estate as thesame is expressly permitted by law.Moreover, the fact that respondents' complaint al$o prayed for the annulment oftitle and recovery of possession does not strip the trial court off of its jurisdictionto hear and decide the case. Asking for the annulment of certain transfers ofproperty could very well be achieved in an action for partition,37as can be seen incases where courts determine the parties' rights arising from complaints askingnot only for the partition of estates but also for the annulment of titles andrecovery of ownership and possession of property.3An action for partition, therefore, is premised on the existence or non-existenceof co-ownership between the parties.