Case Digest (G.R. No. L-45278)
Facts:
Napoleon Antazo v. People of the Philippines and the Hon. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-45278. August 28, 1985. The Supreme Court First Division, Alampay, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioner Napoleon Antazo, a lawyer and former municipal judge and owner of Lot No. 2 (1,452 sq. m.) in Barrio Calumpang, Binangonan, Rizal (TCT No. 147525), contracted on June 18, 1965 to sell a 295-sq.m. portion (Lot 2-A-2) to Mariano Medina. The contract was an installment sale for P4,277.00 and expressly provided that ownership would remain with Antazo until full payment.
On August 19, 1965 Antazo, without Medina’s knowledge or consent, mortgaged the entire Lot 2-A to Binangonan Rural Bank for P3,000; that mortgage was discharged only on August 14, 1971. Medina completed the installment payments on July 16, 1966 and demanded delivery of the title and execution of an absolute deed. On August 12, 1966 Antazo executed a Deed of Absolute Sale containing an express warranty that the lot was “free from all liens and encumbrances,” although the mortgage still subsisted; subsequently a levy by virtue of a judgment in Philippine National Bank v. Napoleon Antazo was also inscribed on the title on September 27, 1967.
After unsuccessful demands, Medina’s counsel wrote Antazo on February 2, 1970; Antazo did not reply. On May 4, 1971 Antazo was charged with estafa under paragraph 2, Article 316, Revised Penal Code in Criminal Case No. 326-M before the Court of First Instance of Rizal. The trial court found Antazo guilty and, on August 14, 1971, sentenced him to arresto mayor for two months and one day and ordered him to pay P4,277.00, with subsidiary imprisonment in default of payment.
Antazo appealed to the Court of Appeals. On October 21, 1976 the Fifth Division affirmed the trial court’s conviction but modified the subsidiary imprisonment to P8.00 per day (not to exceed one-third of the principal penalty nor more than one year). Petitioner filed a petition for certiorar...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was petitioner guilty of estafa under Article 316, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code for representing in the Deed of Absolute Sale that Lot No. 2-A-2 was “free from all liens and encumbrances” when it was mortgaged and levied?
- Does the fact that the mortgage was recorded in the Register of Deeds, which gives constructive notice, negate deceit and exonerate pet...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)