Castillo v. Samonte that the notice be in writing by the vendor.

The Court cannot expand the

G.R. L-13146 – January 30, 1960
J. Barrera
Topic: Legal Redemption – Period to Redeem
Doctrine: It was not the intention of the law to include verbal notice or any other means of
information as sufficient to give the effect of notice required in the sale by a co-heir of his
undivided share in property.Thus, registration of the Deed of Sale does not effectively run the
period for prescription of an heir’s right of redemption.
Plaintiff-Appellee: Valentin Castillo
Defendant-Appellant: Arturo Samonte
Summary: An heir sold to Samonte his undivided share on an unregistered land. Valentin
Castillo offered to repurchase the land, but Samonte refused to sell arguing that the right of
redemption already prescribed 30 days after the registration of the Deed of Sale. The Court
ruled in favor of Valentin, citing that the latter exercised his right validly. The registration of
land does not reflect the intent of the law that heirs be notified in writing.
letter of the law by including any other kind of notice.
 On actual knowledge of sale: Court did not rule on whether actual knowledge
satisfies the requirement provided in NCC1088. However, by offering to repurchase
the property, Valentin effectively established his right to redeem and to bring action
in court to enforce his right of redemption anytime thereafter.
 Sempio v. Del Rosario: “...the right of legal redemption and the right to commence
actions are of an entirely different nature. The first creates a substantive right which,
in the absence of the article, would never exist; the second restricts the period in
which a cause of action may be asserted”
 This means that, unless restricted by the Statue of Limitations (which in this case is
not) and as long as the person exercising his right already offered to repurchase
within a month, an action to enforce the right may be brought anytime thereafter.
ITC, 3 months lapsed before the action was filed in Court.
RULING: Wherefore, modified as above indicated, the judgment of the court a quo is
affirmed in all respects, with costs against the defendant- appellant. So ordered.

FACTS:
 Valentin, Gregorio, Amando, Jose, and Melencia Castillo inherited an unregistered
land from their mother, Romualda Meneses located in Bambang, Bulacan.
 July 13, 1953: Unknown to the other heirs, Gregorio sold for P1,000 his undivided
interest in the property to Arturo Samonte, who in turn successfully registered the
deed of sale with the Register of Deeds of Bulacan on July 16, 1953.
 September 1956: Valentin (Plaintiff) learned about the sale, and offered to redeem
the property from Samonte, but the latter refused, which led to the former filing a
complaint [December 1956] praying that Samonte be ordered to resell the property
to him.
 CFI: In favor of Valentin.

ISSUE + HELD:
1. W/N Valentin may legally redeem the property from Samonte [YES]
 Samonte: The registration of the deed of sale, pursuant to Sec. 511 of the Land
Registration Act was sufficient notice of the sale to the heirs, thus the running of
period of prescription should start from that date. Thus, the offer to redeem the
property more than 3 years from the registration is no longer valid since it’s way
beyond the 30-day prescription period prescribed in NCC10882.
o SC: The provision in the LRA cannot apply since it specifically talks
about registered lands. Added to this, NCC1088 specifically provides
1
LRA, Sec. 51: Every conveyance, mortgage, lease, lien, attachment, order, decree,
instrument, or entry affecting registered land which would under existing laws, if recorded,
filed or entered in the office of the register of deeds, affect the real estate to which it relates
shall, if registered, filed, or entered in the office of the register of deeds in the province or city
where the real estate to which such instrument relates lies, be notice to all persons from the
time such registering, filing or entering
2
NCC1088: Should 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, provided they do so within the period of one month from the time they
were notified in writing of the sale by the vendor