Reynaldo v. Court of Appeals

Summary

This case involves heirs of Leocadio Medrano who discovered that their co-heir Sixto had fraudulently sold portions of inherited property by falsely claiming to be the sole heir. The Supreme Court ruled that while the sale was valid, it affected only Sixto's undivided share as co-owner (292.75 square meters out of 1,695 square meters sold), not the entire property. The Court rejected the buyers' claims of acquisitive prescription, finding they were not purchasers in good faith since they had notice of other heirs' interests. The case establishes important principles on co-ownership rights, the limits of sales by individual co-owners, and the requirements for acquisitive prescription in property disputes involving inherited land.