Gavina Maglucot-Aw v. Leopoldo Maglucot

Summary

This property dispute involved the partition of Lot No. 1639, originally owned by six co-owners. The core issue was whether a valid partition occurred in 1952 following a court order and sketch plan. The RTC found in favor of petitioners based on estoppel principles, but the Court of Appeals reversed, finding no valid partition due to procedural defects. The Supreme Court reinstated the RTC decision, holding that despite the interlocutory nature of the 1952 order under prevailing jurisprudence, the parties were estopped from questioning the partition after over 40 years of acquiescence. The Court recognized both the 1946 oral partition and its ratification through conduct, including respondents' payment of rent and admission in tax declarations. The decision establishes important precedents on estoppel in partition cases and the validity of oral partitions when ratified by conduct.