21. SPS. VIRGILIO F. SANTOS & ESPERANZA LATI SANTOS, SPS.VICTORINO F.

SANTOS, & LAGRIMAS

SANTOS, ERNESTO F. SANTOS, and TADEO F. SANTOS, Petitioners, vs. SPS. JOSE LUMBAO and
PROSERFINA LUMBAO, Respondents.
[G.R. No. 169129 March 28, 2007 CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:]

TOPIC: II. General Provisions

DOCTRINE: Whatever rights and obligations the decedent have over the property were transmitted to the heirs by
way of succession, a mode of acquiring the property, rights and obligations of the decedent to the extent of the value
of the inheritance of the heirs.
FACTS:
1. Petitioners Virgilio, Victorino, Ernesto and Tadeo, all surnamed Santos, are the legitimate and surviving heirs
of the late Rita Catoc Santos (Rita), who died on 20 October 1985. Petitioners Esperanza Lati and Lagrimas
Santos are the daughters-in-law of Rita.
2. Respondents Spouses Jose Lumbao and Proserfina Lumbao are the alleged owners of the 107-square meter
lot (subject property), which they purportedly bought from Rita during her lifetime.
3. Rita sold to respondents Spouses Lumbao the subject property which is a part of her share in the estate
of her deceased mother, Maria Catoc (Maria), who died intestate.
a. It was evidence by documents entitled, Bilihan ng Lupa
4. Respondents Lumbao later on took actual possession thereof and built a house which they have been
occupying as exclusive owners up to the present.
5. Lumbaos made several demands from Rita and the heirs for them to execute the necessary documents to
effect the issuance of a separate title in their favor.
a. Lumbaos alleged that prior to her death, Rita informed respondent Proserfina Lumbao she could not
deliver the title to the subject property because the entire property inherited by her and her co-heirs
from Maria had not yet been partitioned
6. Lumbaos alleged that the petitioners acted fraudulently and are conspiring with another by executing a Deed
of Extrajudicial Settlement portioning among themselves the properties of Maria, including the subject
property.
7. Lumbaos then sent a formal demand to petitioners but the latter refused to reconvey the subject property. So
the Lumbaos filed a Complaint for Reconveyance before RTC of Pasig City.
8. Petitioners denied the alleged sale to Lumbaos and that the Extrajudicial Settlement was duly published as
required by law.
9. Lumbaos then amended their complaint, discovering that the petitioners executed a Deed of Real Estate
Mortgage in favour of Julieta S. Esplana for P30,000.
10. The RTC ruled in favor of the petitioners and ordered the Lumbaos to pay them P30,000 for expenses
incurred.
11. The CA ruled in favor of the respondent spouses Lumbao.
12. Hence the petition:
a. Petitioners contend that they are not bound by the Bilihan ng Lupa because it is null and void for
being falsified because of the following:
i. one of those documents made it appear that petitioners Virgilio and Tadeo were witnesses to
its execution and that they appeared personally before the notary public, when in truth and in
fact they did not.
ii. Identity of the properties were not established by the evidence presented
iii. Respondents are estopped by laches from claimining
iv. Claim on the properties had already prescribed.

ISSUE: Are the petitioner heirs bound to the Bilihan ng Lupa executed by the Rita, their mother, in favor of the
respondent spouses Lumbao?

HELD: Yes. Petition denied.

1. General Rule: heirs are bound by contracts entered into by their predecessors-in-interest
2. whatever rights and obligations the decedent have over the property were transmitted to the heirs by way of
succession, a mode of acquiring the property, rights and obligations of the decedent to the extent of the value
of the inheritance of the heirs
3. In the present case the heirs cannot escape the obligation of the deceased since they only inherited the
property.
4. Being heirs, there is privity of interest between them and their deceased mother. They only succeed to what
rights their mother had and what is valid and binding against her is also valid and binding as against
them.
5. Death of a party does not excuse non-performance of a contract which involves a property right and the
rights and obligations thereunder pass to the personal representatives of the deceased.
 6. Heirs must reconvey to the respondent Lumbaos the 107sq. m. lot.
OTHER ISSUE: the documents Bilihan ng Lupa is presumed valid being notarized, a public instrument, unless the
contrary has been proved. In the case, petitioners failed to prove the falsity of the documents.