8/9/2019 Cua Analysis

1/2

Allan S. Marcaban

Researcher

JOSEPH CUA vs. GLORIA A. VARGAS, et. al.

Facts:

A parcel of land (99 sq. m.) was left behind by the late Paulina Vargas. The heirs

executed a notaried extra!udicial settlement among themsel"es# partitioning and

ad!udicating unto themsel"es the lot in question# each of them getting a share of $$ sq

meters. Among the heirs# only %ster# Visitacion# &uan# 'enaida and osario signed it.

lorentino# Andres# Antonina# and *loria did not sign the document. The document was

 published for three consecuti"e wee+s. An extra,! settlement with sale was again

executed. -nce more# only %#V#'# and signed and their shares were sold to &oseph

ua. According to *loria# she came to +now of the settlement only when the originalhouse was being demolished. /he also claimed that she was unaware of the first

document. /he sent a letter to petitioner in order to redeem the property. 0hen *loria and

&ose failed to reach an amicable settlement# the former filed a case for annulment of the

%&/ and legal redemption of the lot. After trial on the merits# the 1T rendered a

decision in fa"or of petitioner. The 1T upheld the sale to petitioner because the

transaction purportedly occurred after the partition of the property among the co,owner 

heirs. The T affirmed the 1T decision. -n appeal# the A re"ersed the ruling

of both lower courts. 1 denied.

Issues:

$. 0hether heirs are deemed constructi"ely notified and bound# regardless of their 

failure to participate therein# by an extra!udicial settlement and partition of estate when

the extra!udicial settlement and partition has been duly published2

3. 0hether the written notice required to be ser"ed by an heir to his co,heirs in

connection with the sale of hereditary rights to a stranger before partition under Article

$455 of the i"il ode can be dispensed with when such co,heirs ha"e actual +nowledge

of the sale.

Prnc!les:

Art. $455. /hould any of the heirs sell his hereditary rights to a stranger before the

 partition# any or all of the co,heirs may be subrogated to the rights of the purchaser by

reimbursing him for the price of the sale# pro"ided they do so within the period of one

month from the time they were notified in writing of the sale by the "endor. ($467a)

8/9/2019 Cua Analysis

2/2

Ruln":

$. The publication of the settlement does not constitute constructi"e notice to the heirs

who had no +nowledge or did not ta+e part in it because the same was notice after the

fact of execution. The requirement of publication is geared for the protection of creditors

and was ne"er intended to depri"e heirs of their lawful participation in the decedent8sestate. n this connection# the records of the present case confirm that respondents ne"er 

signed either of the settlement documents# ha"ing disco"ered their existence only shortly

 before the filing of the present complaint. ollowing ule 7:# these extra!udicial

settlements do not bind respondents# and the partition made without their +nowledge and

consent is in"alid insofar as they are concerned.;This is not to say# though# that

respondents8 co,heirs cannot "alidly sell their hereditary rights to third persons e"en

 before the partition of the estate. The heirs who actually participated in the execution of 

the extra!udicial settlements# which included the sale to petitioner of their pro indi"iso

shares in the sub!ect property# are bound by the same.