Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
*
G.R. No. 157493. February 5, 2007.
_______________
* THIRD DIVISION.
229
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
clear and leave no doubt upon the intention of the contracting parties,
the literal meaning of its stipulation shall control.—We also cannot
sustain the allegation of the petitioners that assuming the signatures
indicate consent, such consent was merely conditional, and that, the
effectivity of the alleged Contract to Sell was subject to the suspensive
condition that the sale be approved by all the coowners. The Contract
to Sell is clear enough. It is a cardinal rule in the interpretation of
contracts that if the terms of a contract are clear and leave no doubt
upon the intention of the contracting parties, the literal meaning of its
stipulation shall control. The terms of the Contract to Sell made no
mention of the condition that before it can become valid and binding, a
unanimous consent of all the heirs is necessary. Thus, when the
language of the contract is explicit, as in the present case, leaving no
doubt as to the intention of the parties thereto, the literal meaning of its
stipulation is controlling.
230
consent of all the co-heirs. Article 493 of the Civil Code expressly
provides: Article 493. Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of
his part and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may
therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute another
person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are involved. But
the effect of the alienation or the mortgage, with respect to the co-
owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in
the division upon the termination of the coownership. [Emphases
supplied.] Consequently, even without the consent of the two co-heirs,
Adolfo and Jesus, the Contract to Sell is still valid and binding with
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
231
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
_______________
232
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
_______________
3 Rollo, p. 58.
4 Id., at p. 59.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
233
_______________
5 Id., at p. 235.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
6 Records, p. 44.
7 Rollo, pp. 53-57.
8 Id., at p. 68.
234
9
After trial on the merits, the lower court rendered a Decision
dated 27 March 1996 in favor of the respondent, the dispositive
portion of which reads:
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
_______________
235
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 9/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
_______________
236
237
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 11/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
238
_______________
13 Jardine Davies, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 389 Phil. 204, 212; 333 SCRA
684, 693 (2000).
239
_______________
240
241
did not understand the contents of the said Contract to Sell is devoid of
merit. The [appellate court] also notes that Adolfo (one of the coheirs
who did not sign) also possess the same degree of education as that of
the signing co-heirs (TSN, 15 October 1991, p. 19). He, however, is
employed at the Provincial Treasury Office at Trece Martirez, Cavite
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 15/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
242
_______________
243
“Article 493. Each co-owner shall have the full ownership of his part
and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he may therefore
alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute another person in
its enjoyment, except when personal rights are involved. But the effect
of the alienation or the mortgage, with respect to the co-owners, shall
be limited to the portion which may be allotted to him in the division
upon the termination of the coownership.” [Emphases supplied.]
244
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 18/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
_______________
19 Limson v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 135929, 20 April 2001, 357 SCRA
209, 216.
20 Id., at p. 217.
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 19/21
9/10/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 514
245
246
——o0o——
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000165c20ce36c5d643498003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 21/21