Basa vs. Aguilar

A "third person" within the meaning of Article 1620 of the Civil Code is anyone who is not a co-owner, entitling the remaining co-owners to exercise the right of legal redemption when a co-owner sells their share to their own child or son-in-law, provided the conveyance is onerous and inter vivos.

The seven petitioners and the spouses Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina were co-owners of a single parcel of land in Arayat, Pampanga, each group owning an undivided one-half share. The dispute centers on the interpretation of the right of legal redemption under Article 1620 of the Civil Code when a co-owner alienates their share to relatives by affinity and consanguinity.

The seven petitioners were co-owners pro-indiviso of an undivided one-half share of a 32,383-square-meter parcel of land in Barrio San Mateo, Arayat, Pampanga. Private respondents Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina owned the other undivided half of the same property. On March 6, 1964, Genaro Puyat, with the marital consent of his wife Brigida Mesina, sold his one-half share of the land for ₱1,000.00 to private respondents Primo Tiongson and Macaria Puyat. Primo Tiongson is married to Macaria Puyat, who is the daughter of Genaro Puyat and Brigida Mesina.

Seven days later, on March 13, 1964, the petitioners filed Civil Case No. 2513 before the Court of First Instance of Pampanga, praying that they be allowed to exercise the right of redemption under Article 1620 of the Civil Code. For this purpose, they deposited the sum of ₱1,000.00 with the court as redemption money. The trial court dismissed the case, ruling that there was nothing repugnant to public policy for parents to sell to their children and that the framers of the Civil Code could not have intended to include children of a co-owner within the term "third person" because of their inchoate right of succession.

• Scope of "Third Person": Whether a child or son-in-law of a co-owner qualifies as a "third person" within the meaning of Article 1620 of the Civil Code, thereby triggering the co-owners' right of legal redemption.

• Scope of "Third Person": Yes. A third person under Article 1620 is anyone who is not a co-owner, and the sale of a co-owner's share to his daughter and son-in-law entitles the remaining co-owners to exercise the right of legal redemption.

• Scope of "Third Person": Legal redemption is a privilege created by law for public policy and the convenience of the redemptioner, intended to minimize co-ownership by providing a way out of a potentially disagreeable association. Article 1620 grants a co-owner the right of redemption when shares are sold to a "third person," defined as anyone who is not a co-owner. Primo Tiongson was not a co-owner, nor an heir, nor included in the "family relations" under Article 217 of the Civil Code. The conveyance was onerous and made during the lifetime of the spouses, making the inchoate right of succession—which pertained only to Macaria Puyat—irrelevant. Denying the right of redemption would defeat the policy of minimizing co-ownership and contravene public policy.

• Right of Legal Redemption in Co-ownership — Legal redemption is a privilege created by law partly for reasons of public policy and partly for the benefit and convenience of the redemptioner, to afford a way out of a disagreeable or inconvenient association. It is intended to minimize co-ownership. The right is exercised when the shares of other co-owners are sold to a "third person."
• Definition of "Third Person" under Article 1620 — A third person is anyone who is not a co-owner. This includes children and sons-in-law of the selling co-owner when the conveyance is onerous and inter vivos, as inchoate rights of succession do not negate their status as third persons.

• "A third person, within the meaning of this Article, is anyone who is not a co-owner." — This defines the scope of who may trigger the right of redemption under Article 1620, establishing that familial relations to the selling co-owner do not exclude one from being a third person.
• "To deny to the petitioners the right of redemption recognized in Article 1620 of the Civil Code is to defeat the purpose of minimizing co-ownership and to contravene the public policy in this regard." — This articulates the ratio decidendi, emphasizing the public policy objective behind the legal right of redemption.

• Article 1620, Civil Code — Allows a co-owner to exercise the right of redemption when the shares of other co-owners are sold to a third person. Applied to hold that the sale to the daughter and son-in-law constituted a sale to a third person.
• Article 217, Civil Code — Defines "family relations." Cited to show that Primo Tiongson was not included in the family relations of the selling spouses, further supporting his status as a third person.

Teehankee (Chairman), Makasiar, Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Relova, and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ.