G.R. No. 207051 -

Ruling

WHEREFORE , from the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of [respondents] and against [petitioners]. It is hereby ordered that: 1. Plaintiff [Ricardo Julian] is a co-owner over 15,000 square meters of the undivided property registered for taxation purposes under Assessment of Real Property No. 99-001-00914 in the name of Modesto Willy; 2. [Petitioners] to segregate the said 15,000 square meters identified as Lots 1 and 2 in the Survey Plan prepared by Engr. Jose Fernandez located on the eastern portion of said parcel of land and to deliver the 15,000 square meters to [respondents]; 3. [Respondents] and [petitioners] to execute a project of partition in accordance with this Decision indicating the partition of the property registered under ARP No. 99-001-00914 in the name of Modesto Willy after the finality of this Decision; 4. [Petitioners] to pay [respondents] the amount of Php50,000.00 as attorney's fees; and 5. Costs of this suit. [45] According to the MCTC, the 1963 Agreement [46] and the 1969 Deed of Sale [47] executed by Modesto were public documents; as such, their due execution may only be disputed upon "evidence so clear, strong and convincing as to exclude all controversy as to the falsity of the certificate." [48] Contrary to petitioners' arguments, the MCTC ruled that the 1963 Agreement was not a conditional sale, but an absolute one. [49] The MCTC declared that the conditions stated therein only pertained to the original transferees' obligations to identify their assigned portions and to shoulder expenses for the titling of the subject property. [50] The MCTC found that Modesto intended the sale of the subject property, specifically, the portion thereof (Lots 1 and 2) sold to Ricardo, as evidenced by the November 16, 1968 survey [51] of the subject property. It held that the survey described and delineated the portion initially sold to Dongpaen, and was undertaken for the eventual sale of Lots 1 and 2 to Ricardo. [52] The MCTC likewise found that the discrepancy in the dates of notarization of the various Deeds of Sale [53] between Modesto and Dongpaen on one hand, and Dongpaen and Ricardo, on the other hand, were innocuous. [54] The evidence showed that all the documents were actually prepared on the same date, i.e. , June 17, 1969. [55] The MCTC gave credence to Ricardo's testimony that on June 17, 1969, the scheduled date when all the documents of sale among Modesto, Dongpaen, and Ricardo were to be signed by them and notarized, Modesto did not have a residence certificate number to sign the acknowledgment of the deeds of conveyances. [56] Thus, Modesto had to first obtain a residence certificate before acknowledging and signing the document of sale with Dongpaen on June 24, 1969. [57] On the whole, the MCTC ruled that Modesto validly conveyed the 15,000-square meter portion of the subject property to Dongpaen who then validly transferred it to Ricardo. The MCTC pronounced that as co-owner of the subject property, Rica