Short answer. You have a choice. Article 1101 gives you the option to either compensate the aggrieved co-heir in cash (or by delivering a thing of equivalent kind and quality) or to consent to a new partition. A new partition, if it happens, only affects heirs who received more than their fair share.
What the law says
The heir who is sued shall have the option of indemnifying the plaintiff for the loss, or consenting to a new partition. Indemnity may be made by payment in cash or by the delivery of a thing of the same kind and quality as that awarded to the plaintiff. If a new partition is made, it shall affect neither those who have not been prejudiced nor those have not received more than their just share.
Civil Code, Article 1101 — The Defendant's Option. Read the full provision →
The defendant's two options
Article 1101 gives the heir who is being sued for lesion a genuine choice: pay the aggrieved heir the value of the shortfall, or agree to redo the partition. Neither option is forced on you — you elect. Payment can be made in cash or by handing over a thing of the same kind and quality as whatever the plaintiff was awarded. If you can cover the loss without disturbing the rest of the estate, that is usually the cleaner path.
Who is affected by a new partition
If you choose a new partition, the law protects heirs who were not at fault and did not receive more than their fair share. The provision says a new partition "shall affect neither those who have not been prejudiced nor those have not received more than their just share." In practice this means only the heirs who actually received excess are drawn back in; heirs who already got a fair portion are left alone. You cannot drag everyone back to square one just because one partition went wrong.
What lesion means in this context
A partition may be rescinded for lesion when one heir receives a share worth significantly less than what the law or the decedent intended for them. The aggrieved heir is the one who brings the action; you, as the defendant, are the one who absorbed the benefit of the unequal distribution. Article 1101 is the statute that tells you what to do once that suit succeeds — it is the remedy stage, not the ground for the action itself.
Practical considerations
Whether to pay or re-partition depends on what assets remain in the estate and what you received. If your share was largely liquid or easily valued, a cash settlement tends to be faster and less contentious. If it was land or a business with fluctuating value, both sides may actually prefer a fresh appraisal and re-division. A lawyer can help you calculate the indemnity correctly so you do not underpay and face a follow-up claim, and can assist in documenting whichever option you choose.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Teodoro Sta. Ana vs. Lourdes Panlasigue, et al, G.R. No. 152652, August 31, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →