TITLE adhered to the Ma-ao Mill District and “registered in the name of Esperidion

GR No. | Date | Real Property by Analogy | Ponente | Your Surname Presbitero as the original plantation-owner,” and furnished copies of the writ
of execution to the manager of the Ma-ao Sugar Central Company, but without
Petitioner: Ricardo Presbitero, Executor of the Testate Estate of Esperidion
presenting for registration copies thereof to the Register of Deeds.
Presbitero
4. Nava filed a motion to hear evidence on the market value of the lots. The
Respondents:Hon. Jose F. Fernandez, Helen Caram Nava, and the Provincial Sheriff
motion was granted, but the hearings were suspended when Presbitero
of Negros Occidental.
agreed to cede the properties subject of litigation.
5. In line with this, Presbitero was ordered by the courts to segregate the portion
Recit-Ready: Esperidion Presbitero was ordered by the court to pay Nava in order to
of the properties which pertained to the plaintiff, and to effect final
settle his debts. His failure to do so prompted the court to issue a writ of execution
conveyance of the said portion free from any lien and encumbrance
on a portion of Presbitero’s property. Thus, the Sheriff levied upon and garnished the
whatsoever.
sugar quotas allotted to the plantation audit, and the Ma-ao Mill District. He failed to
6. Presbitero failed to comply, thus Nava moved to declare the market value of
present copies for registration to the Registry of Deeds however. When Presbitero
the lots in question to be P2,500 per hectare based on uncontradicted
would ultimately fail to comply with the order of the lower court, an auction sale was
evidence.
scheduled, the subject of the same being the property subject of the litigation.
7. Presbitero ultimately was not able to comply, and the auction sale on the
However, before the sale took place, Esperidion passed away, and his son, the
property subject of litigation was scheduled.
administrator for the latter’s estate, petitioned the sheriff not to push through with
8. Presbitero died during the pendency of the trial, and proceedings for the
the sale, on the ground that the levy was invalid because the notice was not
settlement of his estate were commenced, prompting the estate
registered with the Registry of Deeds, as was the procedure for real properties.
administrator to petition the sheriff to desist in holding the auction sale on the
Hence, the sole issue for determination is whether or not the sugar quotas are real
ground that the levy on the sugar quotas was invalid because the notice
property. The Court here held that sugar quotas are real property by analogy. As an
thereof was not registered with the Registry of Deeds.
improvement attached to land, by express provision of law, though not physically so
9. Hence, it must be determined whether sugar quotas are real (immovable) or
united, the sugar quotas are inseparable therefrom, just like servitudes and other real
personal properties. If they are realty, then the levy upon them by the sheriff
rights over an immovable, sugar quotas as improvements attached to land, are real
is null and void for lack of compliance with the procedure prescribed in
property by analogy, as is provided by Article 415 paragraph 10 of the Civil Code.
Section 14, Rule 39, in relation with Section 7, Rule 59, of the Rules of Court,
Since the sugar quotas are real property, the levy made upon them by the sheriff is
requiring "the filing with the register of deeds a copy of the orders together
null and void.
with a description of the property”

Doctrine: As an improvement attached to land, by express provision of law, though

ISSUE/S:
not physically so united, the sugar quotas are inseparable therefrom, just like
servitudes and other real rights over an immovable, sugar quotas as improvements
W/N the sugar quotas are immovable property - YES.
attached to land, are real property by analogy.

FACTS:
1. Esperidion Presbitero was ordered by the lower court to pay Nava in order to
settle his debts, but he failed to do so.
2. Nava’s counsel tried to settle the case with Presbitero’s son out of court, but
this likewise failed, thus prompting said counsel to ask for the issuance of a
partial writ of execution for the sum of P12,250.
3. A letter was sent by Nava’s counsel reiterating his previous suggestion for
amicable settlement, but the same produced no fruitful result. The sheriff then
levied upon and garnished the sugar quotas allotted to plantation audit, and
RATIO:
They are immovable properties. Under express provisions of law, the sugar quota
allocations are accessories to land, and cannot have independent existence away from
a plantation, although the latter may vary.
Citing the case of Abelarde v. Lopez, the Court said that even if a contract of sale of
haciendas omitted the right, title, interest, participation, action and rent which the
grantors had or might have in relation to the parcels of land sold, the sale would include
the quotas, it being provided in Section 9, Act 4166 that the allotment is deemed an
improvement attached to the land, and that at the time the contract of sale was signed,
the land devoted to sugar were practically of no use without the sugar allotment.

As an improvement attached to land, by express provision of law, though not physically

so united, the sugar quotas are inseparable therefrom, just like servitudes and other
real rights over an immovable, sugar quotas as improvements attached to land, are real
property by analogy. Article 415 of the Civil Code, in enumerating what are immovable
properties, names —

"10. Contracts for public works, and servitudes and other real rights
over immovable property,"

It is by law, therefore, that these properties are immovable or real, Article 416 of the
Civil Code being made to apply only when the thing (res) sought to be classified is not
included in Article 415.

The fact that the Philippine Trade Act of 1946 allows transfers of sugar quotas does
not militate against their immovability. Neither does the fact that the Sugar Quota
Office does not require registration of sales of quotas with the Register of Deeds for
their validity; nor the fact that allocation of unrefined sugar quotas is not made among
lands planted to sugarcane but among "the sugar producing mills and plantation
OWNERS", since the lease or sale of quotas are voluntary transactions, the regime of
which is not necessarily identical to involuntary transfers or levies; and there cannot be
a sugar plantation owner without land to which the quota is attached; and there can
exist no quota without there being first a corresponding plantation.

Hence, since sugar quotas are considered real property, the levy made upon them by
the sheriff is null and void.