ADILLE vs CA

Facts:
 11,000 sqm property in Legaspi, Albay owned by Felisa Alzul
 Rustico Adille is her child in 1st marriage and the respondents are her children in
2nd marriage
 1939 she sold the property in pacto de retro (3yrs)
 She died not able to redeem, Rustico was able to redeem the property
 He executed an affidavit of extrajudicial partition in which he claims that he was
an only child and only heir to the land
 1945 OCT was issued; Emeteria Asejo is occupying certain portions of the land
 1974 Other co-owners filed a case
RTC: Rustico
CA: reversed
Issue: May a co-owner acquire exclusive ownership over the property held in common?
SC: affirmed

Held:
The right of repurchase may be exercised by a co-owner with respect to his share alone.
He may compel co-owner to reimburse him to necessary expense; redemption and
shouldering of expenses did not end co-ownership Art 488

Art 1613 Vendee in redemption may not be compelled to consent to a partial

redemption; redemption of one-owner does not vest him with sole ownership

Rustico was held to be trustee of an implied trust; fraud attended to the registration of
title; he misrepresent that he was the only heir of the predecessor
Art. 1456. If property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person obtaining it is, by
force of law, considered a trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of the person from
whom the property comes.

Prescription, as a mode of terminating a relation of co-ownership, must have been

preceded by repudiation (of the co-ownership). The act of repudiation, in turn, is subject
to certain conditions: (1) a co-owner repudiates the co-ownership; (2) such an act of
repudiation is clearly made known to the other co-owners; (3) the evidence thereon is
clear and conclusive; and (4) he has been in possession through open, continuous,
exclusive, and notorious possession of the property for the period required by law.

-He did not comply with requisites, as he never openly repudiated ownership; he kept
the other in the dark by feigning sole owner of the dispute land
-Prescription cannot set in as he was in bad faith; reckoning period should start at the
time when fraud was discovered