This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-09-14 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| This Court finds that Article 1878 (5) and (15) is inapplicable to the case at bench. It has been held in several cases[48] that partition among heirs is not legally deemed a conveyance of real property resulting in change of ownership. It is not a transfer of property from one to the other, but rather, it is a confirmation or ratification of title or right of property that an heir is renouncing in favor of another heir who accepts and receives the inheritance. It is merely a designation and segregation of that part which belongs to each heir. The Deed of Extra-Judicial Partition cannot, therefore, be considered as an act of strict dominion. Hence, a special power of attorney is not necessary. | |||||
|
2007-09-05 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Although the petitioners may claim prior, continuous and historical possession over the subject property, such is not material, since the case filed with the MTC is one for Unlawful Detainer only, where prior possession of the plaintiff is not required.[20] Further, under Section 47 of P.D. No. 1529 or the Property Registration Decree, title to the land, once registered, is imprescriptible; that is, it may not be acquired even by adverse, open and notorious possession.[21] To a registered owner under the Torrens system, the right to recover possession of the registered property is equally imprescriptible, since possession is a mere consequence of ownership.[22] | |||||