DY TIAO LAY o Lease was for 20 years extendible for another
GR NO. L-32047| November 1, 1930 20 at lessees option. Ostrand, J. o After termination of original period, lessors eamtrinidad | Group 5 had option to buy all the improvements on the land but if they didnt exercise that PETITONERS/PROSECUTORS: Manuel, Mariano, Pura, and privilege, lease would continue for another Caridad Melencio 20 years RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: Dy Tiao Lay o The document was duly acknowledged but was never recorded with register of deeds. TOPIC: It appeared that Yap Kui Chin always dealt with Co-ownership Pedro R. in lease matters. But then Pedro died. To protest against acts of majority which are Yap Kui Chin died also, so the lease was transferred prejudicial to minority to Uy Eng Jui, then to defendant Dy Tiao Lay. When Ramon died, his widow Liberata was CASE SUMMARY: Plaintiffs are children/heirs of Ramon, appointed administratrix of his estate, which included who co-owned land with his siblings and his nephew Jose P. the land registered under the torrens system. The The land was leased to Yap Kui Chin by their Ramons lease wasnt mentioned in the certificate of title but it siblings, without signature of Ramon or Jose P. The rights of was stated that one house and three warehouses were Yap were assigned to defendant. Plaintiffs prayed that the property of Yap Kui Chin. contract of lease be declared void because it involved alteration Extrajudicial partition of land by heirs of Julian of property but had no signature of all co-owners. SC held the Melencio, then heirs of Ramon Melencio (plaintiffs) contract to be void, not because it lacked the signature of all Liberata, as administratrix of estate of deceased the co-owners but because it went beyond the 6-year limit set Ramon, collected rent for the lease at P20, and later by the Civil Code, since the contract was for 20 years she demanded that the rent be raised to P300. extendible by 40 more years (60 years total). The part owners Defendant then told her that there was a written lease representing the greater portion of the property held in and that he was entitled to an extension. common have no power to lease said property for a longer Plaintiffs insisted that there was no contract of lease period than six years without the consent of all the c- and anyway if there was, it was void because of the oowners, whose propriety rights, expressly recognized by the following: law, would by contracts of long duration be restricted or o Lease contract called for an alteration of the annulled property and thus needed to be signed by all co-owners FACTS: o Contract duration was for a term over six Plaintiffs brought this present action against years, making it null and void because of defendant for the recovery of a parcel of land in Civil Code Art 1548 Nueva Ecija and demanded a monthly rental of P300 o Contract duration was unreasonably long, for the use of occupation of the land and against public policy o Also prayed that if found that defendant Trial court ruled in favor of defendant. occupied land by virtue of a contract of lease, Hence this appeal such contract be declared null and void for lack of consent, concurrence, and ratification ISSUES: by the owners thereof WONthe contract of lease is void because it Land was originally owned by Julian Melencio. He contained alterations to the property and it wasnt died, left wife Ruperta Garcia, and 5 kids Juliana, signed by all co-owners NO Ramon, Ruperta (yeah same name), Pedro R. and WONthe contract of lease is void ANYWAY Emilio. because of other reasons YES. Emilio had a son, Jose P. Then Emilio died. Jose P. then succeeded his fathers interest in the land. RULING: Ruperta Garcia, Pedro R., Juliana, and Ruperta 1st issue: NO. executed lease contract in favor of a Yap Kui Chin. No o Plaintiffs contention is based on article 397 mention of Ramon or Jose P. in the lease. of the Civil Code which provides that "none of the owners shall, without the consent of intervenor Liberata Macapagal in her capacity as the others, make any alterations in the administratrix of the estate of the deceased Ramon Melencio. It common property even though such is further ordered that the defendant pay to said administratrix alterations might be advantageous to all." a monthly rent of P50 for the occupation of the land from May o We do not think that the alterations are of 1st, 1926, until the land is delivered to the administratrix. The sufficient importance to nullify the lease, sum of P272 demanded by the defendant in his counterclaim especially so since none of the co-owners may be deducted from the total amount of the rent due and objected to such alterations until over unpaid. The building erected on the land by the defendant and twenty years after the execution of the his predecessors in interest may be removed by him, or contract of lease. The decision of this court otherwise disposed of, within six months from the in the case of Enriquez vs. A. S. Watson and promulgation of this decision. Without costs. So ordered. Co. (22 Phil., 623), contains a full discussion of the effect of alterations of leased community property, and no further discussion upon the point need here be considered. 2 nd issue: YES. The said contract of lease being for a term of over six years, the same is null and void pursuant to the provision of article 1548 of the Civil Code. Also, the duration of the same is unreasonably long, thus being against public policy. o In the present case only a small majority of the coowners executed the lease here in question, and according to the terms of the contract the lease might be given a duration of sixty years; o The part owners representing the greater portion of the property held in common have no power to lease said property for a longer period than six years without the consent of all the c-oowners, whose propriety rights, expressly recognized by the law, would by contracts of long duration be restricted or annulled; o As under article 1548 of the Civil Code such contracts cannot be entered into by the husband with respect to his wife's property, by the parent or guardian with respect to that of the child or ward, and by the manager in default of special power, since the contract of lease only produces personal obligations, and cannot without the consent of all persons interested or express authority from the owner, be extended to include stipulations which may alter its character, changing it into a contract of partial alienation of the property leased.
DISPOSITIVE: The appealed judgment as to the validity of
the lease is therefore reversed, and it is ordered that the possession of the land in controversy be delivered to the
Gianna Pomata (Editor), Nancy G. Siraisi (Editor) - Historia - Empiricism and Erudition in Early Modern Europe (Transformations - Studies in The History of Science and Technology) (2006)