G.R. No. 179025 – CEBU STATE COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (CSCST), represented by its incumbent President, petitioner, vs. LUIS S. MISTERIO, GABRIEL S. MISTERIO, FRANCIS S. MISTERIO, THELMA S. MISTERIO, and ESTELA S. MISTERIO-TAGIMACRUZ, respondents.
PERALTA, J.
Rule Synopsis
When the exercise of the right to redeem of a vendor-a-retro is subject to a suspensive condition, the period for the exercise shall be four years from the happening of the condition or 10 years from the execution of the contract of sale, whichever comes first.
Facts
On Dec 31, 1956, Asuncion Sadaya (seller) sold her registered land to Sudlon Agricultural High School or SAHS (buyer), subject to the seller’s right of repurchase after SAHS shall have ceased to exist, or shall have transferred its school site elsewhere. The right to repurchase was annotated on SAHS title.
On June 10, 1983, B.P. No. 412 took effect consolidating SAHS with Cebu State College of Science and Technology (CSCST), and transferring its properties thereon. On Aug 19, 1988, [32 years] the heirs of Sadaya sought to repurchase the subject property, notifying the governor of the Province of Cebu on the ground that SAHS ceased to exist. CSCST refused saying SAHS still existed.
Thus, the heirs filed a complaint for Nullity of Sale and/or Redemption against CSCST. The RTC ruled in favor of Sadaya heirs, nullifying the contract of sale.
During the pendency of the appeal, heirs amended their complaint this time citing as a ground for redemption, the transfer of school site. The CA reversed on the ground of prescription, it said that the seller’s right to repurchase had expired four years from the effectivity of B.P. Blg. 412. The SC affirmed.
Issue
Were the Sadaya heirs still entitled to exercise its right of redemption over the subject property?
Ruling and Discussion
No. The Sadaya heirs were no longer entitled to exercise its right of redemption over the subject property.
In a pacto de retro sale, the property subject of the sale may be redeemed only within the limits prescribed by the Art. 1606. Under the said provision, the period for redemption shall not exceed 4 years from the date of the execution of the contract of sale, if there is no agreement as to the period; and if there is such agreement, it must not exceed 10 years.
If the period for exercise is not agreed upon, but the same is suspended or made conditional, as in this case, the four-year prescriptive period shall be counted from the happening of the condition, PROVIDED that the said exercise shall not exceed 10 years from the execution of the contract. In other words, where a condition was imposed on the right of the seller-a-retro to repurchase the property, it must be exercised within 4 years from the happening of the condition, or 10 years from the execution of the contract, whichever comes first.
To allow the seller a period beyond 10 years for the exercise of such right would go against the spirit of the law. The latter being intended to limit uncertain conditions relative to the title to real estate. It was said that longer periods of redemption works to the detriment of the property since a buyer, who is uncertain of his rights, will not cultivate or preserve the property in the same way that an absolute owner will.
Dispositive
Decision reversed and set aside.