Nazarenovs CA

G.R. No. 138842 October 18, 2000 Article 1225

FACT!
1. MaximinoNazareno, Sr. and AureaPoblete were husband and wife. Aurea died on April 15, 197, while Maximino, Sr. died on !e"ember
1#, 19#. $he% had fi&e "hildren, namel%, Nati&idad, 'omeo, (ose, Pa"ifi"o, and Maximino, (r. Nati&idad and Maximino, (r. are the
petitioners in this "ase, while the estate of Maximino, Sr., 'omeo, and his wife )liza Nazareno are the respondents.
*. +t appears that after the death of Maximino, Sr., 'omeo filed an intestate "ase in the ,-+ of ,a&ite. .pon the reor/anization of the "ourts in
19#0. 'omeo was appointed administrator of his father1s estate.
0. +n the "ourse of the intestate pro"eedin/s, 'omeo dis"o&ered that his parents had exe"uted se&eral deeds of sale "on&e%in/ a number of
real properties in fa&or of his sister, Nati&idad. 2ne of the deeds in&ol&ed six lots in 3uezon ,it% whi"h were alle/edl% sold b% Maximino,
Sr., with the "onsent of Aurea, to Nati&idad on (anuar% *9, 197 for the total amount of P47,#..
4. Amon/ the lot sold to Nati&idad was a lot o""upied b% 'omeo, his wife )liza, and b% Maximino, (r. sin"e 1959. .n6nown to 'omeo,
Nati&idad sold the said lot on (ul% 01, 19#* to Maximino, (r. 7-2' !+S,.SS+2NS SA8) 9)$S ,A99 $:) 92$ S.;(),$ 2- $:)
P'2,))!+N< "T#$ %AN&'=
5. >hen 'omeo found out about the sale to Maximino, (r., he and his wife )liza lo"6ed Maximino, (r. out of the house. 2n Au/ust 4, 19#0,
Maximino, (r. brou/ht an a"tion for re"o&er% of possession and dama/es. $he trial "ourt ruled in fa&or of Maximino, (r. +n the ,A affirmed
the de"ision of the trial "ourt.
5. 'omeo in turn filed, on behalf of the estate of Maximino, Sr., the present "ase for annulment of sale with dama/es a/ainst Nati&idad and
Maximino, (r.
7. Nati&idad and Maximino, (r. filed a third?part% "omplaint a/ainst the spouses 'omeo and )liza. $he% alle/ed that the , whi"h was in"luded
in the !eed of Absolute Sale of (anuar% *9, 197 to Nati&idad, had been surreptitiousl% appropriated b% 'omeo b% se"urin/ for himself a
new title in his name. $he% alle/ed that @$:) 9AN!A is bein/ leased b% the spouses 'omeo and )liza to third persons. $he% therefore
sou/ht the annulment of the transfer to 'omeo and the "an"ellation of his title, the e&i"tion of 'omeo and his wife )liza and all persons
"laimin/ ri/hts from @$:) 9AN!A, and the pa%ment of dama/es.
#. ;ased on the findin/ of '$, Nati&idad said that she had the title to 9ot 0 but it somehow /ot lost. She "ould not /et an ori/inal "op% of the
said title be"ause the re"ords of the 'e/istrar of !eeds had been destro%ed b% fire. She "laimed she was surprised to learn that 'omeo
was able to obtain a title to @$:) 9AN!A in his name.
9. 'omeo howe&er was able to pro&e that he bou/ht from his parents the said @$:) 9AN!.A
1. $he '$, de"ided that the deed exe"uted in fa&or of Nati&idad b% her parents null and &oid, thus renderin/ all the lot a"Buired in"ludin/
@$:) 9AN!A restorin/ the propert% to Maximino Sr. and her wife. $he ,A modified the de"ision of the '$, that the @$:) 9AN!A in the
name of 'omeo Nazareno. and 9ot 0?; 7in the name of MaximinoNazareno, (r.=, as well as to 9ots 1 and 11 were "an"elled and ordered
restored to the estate of MaximinoNazareno, Sr.Petitoners appealed the de"ision but was denied. :en"e this petition to the ,A.
()$!
>2N $he !eed of Absolute Sale dated (anuar% *9, 197 is an indi&isible "ontra"tC
(T ( (N&(*((+%$.As s,c-, it bein. in/ivisible, it can not be ann,lle/ b0 onl0 one o1 t-e2. An/ since t-is s,it 3as 1ile/ onl0 b0 t-e estate
o1 4a5i2ino A. Nazareno, r. 3it-o,t incl,/in. t-e estate o1 A,rea6oblete, t-e 7resent s,it 2,st 1ail. T-e estate o1 4a5i2ino A. Nazareno,
r. can not ca,se its ann,l2ent 3-ile its vali/it0 is s,staine/ b0 t-e estate o1 A,rea6oblete.
#$%&!
An obli/ation is indi&isible when it "annot be &alidl% performed in parts, whate&er ma% be the nature of the thin/ whi"h is the obDe"t thereof.
$he indi&isibilit% refers to the prestation and not to the obDe"t thereof. +n the present "ase, the !eed of Sale of (anuar% *9, 197 supposedl%
"on&e%ed the six lots to Nati&idad. $he obli/ation is "learl% indi&isible be"ause the performan"e of the "ontra"t "annot be done in parts, otherwise
the &alue of what is transferred is diminished. Petitioners are therefore mista6en in basin/ the indi&isibilit% of a "ontra"t on the number of obli/ors.
+n an% "ase, if petitioners1 onl% point is that the estate of Maximino, Sr. alone "annot "ontest the &alidit% of the !eed of Sale be"ause the estate of
Aurea has not %et been settled, the ar/ument would nonetheless be without merit. $he &alidit% of the "ontra"t "an be Buestioned b% an%one affe"ted
b% it. A &oid "ontra"t is inexistent from the be/innin/. :en"e, e&en if the estate of Maximino, Sr. alone "ontests the &alidit% of the sale, the out"ome of
the suit will bind the estate of Aurea as if no sale too6 pla"e at all.
Digest of Charles Atienza