G.R. No. 104769 - AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals

Solid Homes, Inc. filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court of Appeals’ decision reversing an earlier ruling that ordered the cancellation of the lis pendens on titles issued to AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. (AFPMBAI).
The titles in question were originally clean and free of encumbrances following an absolute sale from Investco, Inc. to AFPMBAI, with AFPMBAI presumed to be a purchaser in good faith and for value.

Solid Homes, Inc. argued that a notice of lis pendens (purportedly a pencil marking) had been duly annotated on the vendor’s title and carried over to titles issued to AFPMBAI as a transferee pendente lite.
The Court clarified that the Revised Rules of Court require proper, non-provisional annotations for a valid notice of lis pendens to be effective as an alert to third parties.
It was determined that the action on which the lis pendens was based pertained only to the collection of a sum of money and did not directly involve rights, possession, or ownership interests in the subject property.

A contract to sell and to buy between Solid Homes, Inc. and Investco, Inc., which was not fully performed due to default by Solid Homes, Inc.
An absolute sale between Investco, Inc. and AFPMBAI that culminated in the full payment and subsequent transfer of titles to AFPMBAI.

AFPMBAI was not a party to the earlier contract to sell (executed in 1976) but acquired the property directly through an absolute sale after Solid Homes, Inc. failed to comply with its installment obligations.
Investco, Inc.'s issuance of titles without any lis pendens annotation reinforced the status of AFPMBAI as a bona fide purchaser.

The case involved multiple prior actions, including the original civil case (Civil Case No. 40615) for collection of sums against Solid Homes, Inc.
Solid Homes, Inc. later attempted to set aside a trial court’s order which had denied its motion to execute the decision in Civil Case No. 40615.
It was noted that Solid Homes, Inc. had previously filed a motion for execution in the court of origin, which was denied, and subsequently filed a petition for certiorari.

Whether the pencil marking purported to serve as a valid annotation of lis pendens can be accepted as proper notice affecting the titles issued to AFPMBAI.
Whether the annotation, based on an action for collection of money, was proper given that it did not directly concern the subject property.

Whether AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. qualifies as a purchaser in good faith and for value based on the Torrens system and the doctrine of indefeasibility of titles.
The impact of the absence of proper lis pendens on the validity of the transfers.

Whether the transaction between Solid Homes, Inc. and Investco, Inc. (a contract to sell) and the transaction between Investco, Inc. and AFPMBAI (an absolute sale) could constitute a double sale.
How the distinction between a contract to sell and an absolute sale affects the parties’ rights and remedies.

Whether Solid Homes, Inc., as the losing party in Civil Case No. 40615, had the standing to move for the execution of a final judgment despite Investco, Inc. being absent or having re-sold the property.