Facts:

The case, Antonio C. Aragon vs. Marcos Jorge, Provincial Treasurer of Zambales, arose from a dispute involving the petitioner's request for a mandamus to compel the provincial treasurer to issue final bills of sale for multiple parcels of land located in the municipalities of Santa Cruz and Candelaria, Zambales. The petitioner, Antonio C. Aragon, claimed to have purchased these properties during auction sales conducted by the municipal treasurers due to tax delinquencies. The taxes owed had not been redeemed by the owners within the one-year redemption period.

The auctions for the properties were initially scheduled to occur on specific dates in March and May of 1947; however, they were conducted later than originally advertised—specifically on May 12-15, 1947, in Santa Cruz and on June 12, 1947, in Candelaria—without any new public notice or notification to the delinquent owners. The sales were deemed irregular as only 253 parcels were ultimately sold in Santa Cruz for a m

...

Facts:

Background of the Case

• Antonio C. Aragon, the petitioner and appellant, filed a petition for mandamus seeking to compel Marcos Jorge, the provincial treasurer of Zambales, to issue final bills of sale covering numerous parcels of land.
• The properties in question were located in the municipalities of Santa Cruz and Candelaria, Zambales, and arose from auction sales conducted for tax delinquencies under the provisions of Section 35 of Commonwealth Act No. 470 (the Assessment Law).

Details of the Sales

• Municipal Auction in Santa Cruz
• The real properties were originally advertised for sale “at public auction to be held at the main entrance of the municipal building from March 24, 1947, at 10 a.m. until all sold.”
• The auction did not occur on the fixed date but was postponed to May 12, 13, 14, and 15, 1947, without any new advertisement or notice to the affected landowners and the public.
• A total of 253 parcels, with an aggregate assessed value of P67,150, were sold for only P1,471.
• Municipal Auction in Candelaria
• The properties were originally advertised to be sold on May 5, 1947, following similar terms as in Santa Cruz.
• The sale was postponed and eventually held on June 12, 1947, again without a fresh advertisement or notice to the delinquent taxpayers and landowners.
• On this occasion, 71 lots with an aggregate assessed value of P32,250 were sold for only P820.19.

Participation and Conduct of the Parties

• The petitioner, Antonio C. Aragon, did not actively bid at the auctions. Instead, a third party named Pedro Porras was the actual bidder at both sales.
• Although Pedro Porras made the bid, the purchase price was paid by Public Defender Moises Ma. Buhain, who also arranged for the issuance of official receipts in the name of Aragon.
• Public Defender Buhain later appeared in court as the counsel and attorney-in-fact for the petitioner, raising suspicions that Aragon might only have been a dummy for Buhain.

Legal and Procedural Concerns

• The provincial treasurer, supported by an opinion from the provincial fiscal, maintained that the sales were void due to irregularities—particularly the failure to provide proper notice as required by law.
• The trial court had intimated that the petitioner might be acting as a dummy for the public defender, which could constitute a violation of Section 579 of the Revised Administrative Code that prohibits public officials from purchasing property from the government when sold for tax delinquencies.
• However, in the absence of a categorical finding regarding the dummy allegation, the Court of First Instance based its decision on the alleged nullity of the sales due to the lack of required advertisement or notice to the affected parties.

Issue:

Whether the lack of proper notice and advertisement for the postponed auction sales vitiates the validity of the transactions.

• Did the failure to adhere to the fixed dates as originally advertised, and the absence of a new notice to the affected delinquent taxpayers and landowners, render the sales null and void?
• Can the respondent provincial treasurer be legally compelled to issue final bills of sale for transactions tainted by such irregularities?

Whether the petitioner’s apparent role as a dummy for Public Defender Moises Ma. Buhain has any bearing on the validity of the sale.

• Although there was suspicion that Aragon was merely a front, does this fact materially affect the court’s decision in light of the legal issue regarding notice?
• Was there sufficient, categorical finding by the trial court to base a decision on the alleged violation under Section 579 of the Revised Administrative Code?

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)