Back

Purita A. Pahud, et al. Vs. Court of Appeals, et al. [CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION, J. CARPIO-MORALES]

PURITA PAHUD, SOLEDAD PAHUD, and IAN LEE CASTILLA (represented by Mother and Attorney-in-Fact VIRGINIA CASTILLA), Petitioners, versus COURT OF APPEALS, SPOUSES ISAGANI BELARMINO and LETICIA OCAMPO, EUFEMIA SAN AGUSTIN-MAGSINO, ZENAIDA SAN AGUSTIN-McCRAE, MILAGROS SAN AGUSTIN-FORTMAN, MINERVA SAN AGUSTIN-ATKINSON, FERDINAND SAN AGUSTIN, RAUL SAN AGUSTIN, ISABELITA SAN AGUSTIN-LUSTENBERGER and VIRGILIO SAN AGUSTIN, Respondents.

G.R. No. 160346 | 2009-08-25

CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION

CARPIO MORALES, J.: 

The ponencia reinstates the trial court's Decision of January 14, 1998 with the modification that "the sale made by respondent Virgilio San Agustin to respondent spouses Isagani Belarmino and Leticia Ocampo is valid only with respect to the 1/8 portion of the subject property."[1] 

I submit that the validity of the sale to spouses Belarmino extends to 4/8 or one-half of the property, inclusive of the combined 3/8 share of respondents-sisters Zenaida, Milagros and Minerva, all bearing the maiden surname of San Agustin, thus leaving only one-half of the property to petitioners...