FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 242917. February 18, 2019.]
LEO E. HERNANDEZ, petitioner,vs. EDNA HERNANDEZ-JALOTJOT AND EDWINA HERNANDEZ-JIMENEZ, REPRESENTED BY HER ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, EDNA HERNANDEZ-JALOTJOT, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedFebruary 18, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 242917 — (Leo E. Hernandez v. Edna Hernandez-Jalotjot and Edwina Hernandez-Jimenez, represented by her attorney-in-fact, Edna Hernandez-Jalotjot)
After review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its June 21, 2018 Decision 1 and October 18, 2018 Resolution, 2 as to warrant the exercise of the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
As correctly ruled by the CA, the extrajudicial settlement executed by the parties reveals that they inherited the subject property pro indiviso. The extrajudicial settlement did not state the specific portions allotted to each sibling, rather it merely stated that each lot is co-owned by all three siblings. Accordingly, the purported prior agreement asserted by Leo E. Hernandez (petitioner) regarding the distribution per lot of the property is immaterial because the extrajudicial settlement of estate clearly states that they shall be co-owners of the said property. Hence, there is necessity for a subsequent and actual partition of the subject property, the filing of the action for partition, in order to terminate the co-ownership. The CA also correctly affirmed the decision of the RTC, which directed the partition of the subject property. Respondents Edna Hernandez-Jalotjot and Edwina Hernandez-Jimenez cannot be compelled to stay in the co-ownership simply because petitioner refuses to adhere to the manner of partition directed by the RTC. To reiterate, the purported prior agreement asserted by petitioner as determinative of the shares of the parties cannot be sustained since the extrajudicial settlement of estate subsequently executed by the parties and registered with the Register of Deeds is controlling.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The June 21, 2018 Decision and October 18, 2018 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 04631-MIN are AFFIRMED.
The petitioner is required to SUBMIT within five (5) days from notice hereof, a soft copy in compact disc, USB or e-mail containing the PDF file of the signed petition for review on certiorari and annexes, pursuant to A.M. Nos. 10-3-7-SC and 11-9-4-SC.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 20-34; penned by Associate Justice Tita Marilyn Payoyo-Villordon, with Associate Justices Romulo V. Borja and Oscar V. Badelles, concurring.
2.Id. at 64-65; penned by Associate Justice Tita Marilyn Payoyo-Villordon, with Associate Justices Oscar V. Badelles and Walter S. Ong, concurring.