EDUARDO C. TAEDO, petitioner, vs. HON. JUANITO A.

BERNAD, Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, 7th Judicial Region, Branch XXI, Cebu City; Spouses ROMEO SIM and PACITA S. SIM; and Spouses ANTONIO CARDENAS and MAE LINDA CARDENAS, respondents. G.R. No. L-66520 August 30, 1988 FACTS: Private respondent Antonio Cardenas (Cardenas) was the owner of two (2) contiguous parcels of land known as Lot 7501-A and Lot 7501-B. An apartment building was constructed on Lot 7501-A is in which a small portion of it also stands on Lot 7501-B. On Lot 7501-B, the improvements therein consist of a four-door apartment, two-storey house, a bodega and a septic tank for the common use of the occupants of Lots 7501-A and 7501-B. Cardenas sold Lot 7501-A to petitioner Eduardo Taedo (Taedo) and also mortgaged Lot 7501-B to the latter with a promise to sell the same. However, Cardenas sold Lot 7501-B to respondent spouses Romeo and Pacita Sim. Taedo offered to redeem the property from Romeo Sim, but the latter refused. Instead, Romeo Sim blocked the sewage pipe connecting the building of Taedo built on Lot 7501-A, to the septic tank in Lot 7501-B. He also asked Taedo to remove that portion of his building enroaching on Lot 7501-B. Consequently, Taedo, invoking the provisions of Art. 1622 of the Civil Code, filed an action for legal redemption and damages against the spouses Sim and spouses Cardenas. Cardenas, on the other hand, filed a cross-claim against spouses Sim alleging that the deed he executed was intended as an equitable mortgage. While spouses Sim insisted that it was an absolute sale. Respondent judge dismissed the complaint and cross claim for lack of cause of action. Moreover, the trial court ruled that Taedo's right to continue to use the septic tank, erected on Lot 7501-B, ceased upon the subdivision of the land and its subsequent sale to different owners who do not have the same interest. ISSUE: Whether or not the sale to spouses Sim extinguished the easement of the use of the drainage and septic tank by Taedo. HELD: No. Article 631 of the Civil Code provides for the grounds for the extinguishment of an easement. The alienation of the dominant and servient estates to different persons, however, is not one of the grounds for the extinguishment of an easement. On the contrary, use of the easement is continued by operation of law. Furthermore, Article 624 of the Civil Code provides that an easement shall continue actively and passively unless the contrary should be provided in the title of conveyance or it was removed before the execution of the deed. In the instant case, no statement abolishing or extinguishing the easement of drainage was mentioned in the deed of sale of Lot 7501-A to Taedo. Nor did Antonio Cardenas stop the use of the drain pipe and septic tank by the occupants of Lot 7501-A before he sold said lot to Taedo. Hence, the use of the septic tank is continued by operation of law. Accordingly, the spouses Romeo and Pacita Sim the new owners of the servient estate (Lot 7501- B), cannot impair, in any manner whatsoever, the use of the servitude.