Title
Baricuatro, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 105902
Decision Date
Feb 9, 2000
Petitioner bought two lots in 1968, later sold to others despite his possession; Supreme Court ruled he is rightful owner, voiding subsequent sales due to bad faith.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 105902)

Facts:

Purchase of Lots by Petitioner

  • On October 16, 1968, Severino Baricuatro, Jr. (petitioner) purchased two lots (Lot Nos. 9 and 10) in Victoria Village (now Spring Village), Minglanilla, Cebu, from Constantino M. Galeos (respondent) on an installment basis. The purchase prices were P3,320.00 for Lot No. 9 and P4,515.00 for Lot No. 10.
  • Petitioner failed to fully pay the purchase price, leaving an unpaid balance of P1,000.00 for Lot No. 9 and P3,020.00 for Lot No. 10. The titles to the lots remained in Galeos' name.

Improvements and Possession

  • After the purchase, petitioner introduced improvements on the lots and began residing there in 1970. He has been in actual and physical possession of the lots since then.

Subsequent Sale to Respondent Amores

  • On December 7, 1968, Galeos sold the entire subdivision, including Lot Nos. 9 and 10, to Eugenio V. Amores (respondent). Galeos informed petitioner of the sale and advised him to pay the remaining balance directly to Amores.
  • Amores registered the deed of sale on February 13, 1969, and secured individual titles for the subdivided lots, including TCT No. 20016 for Lot No. 9 and TCT No. 20017 for Lot No. 10, both in his name.

Sale to Spouses Nemenio

  • On December 27, 1974, Amores sold Lot Nos. 9 and 10 to spouses Mariano and Felisa Nemenio (respondents). Prior to the sale, Amores informed petitioner through a letter, but petitioner did not respond.
  • The Nemenios registered the titles in their names and demanded that petitioner vacate the lots, but he refused.

Filing of Complaint

  • The Nemenios filed a complaint for quieting of title against petitioner in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu, docketed as Civil Case No. R-15442. Galeos and Amores were later impleaded as third-party defendants.

RTC Decision

  • On November 27, 1986, the RTC ruled in favor of the Nemenios, declaring them as the owners of Lot Nos. 9 and 10. The court ordered petitioner to vacate the lots after being indemnified for the improvements, or alternatively, to sell the lots to petitioner. The court also ordered Galeos to refund petitioner the amount paid for the lots.

Court of Appeals Decision

  • The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision on April 30, 1992, holding that Amores and the Nemenios were purchasers in good faith and that Article 1544 of the Civil Code applied.

Issue:

  1. Whether respondent Amores validly acquired ownership of Lot Nos. 9 and 10 and acted in good faith when he registered the sale.
  2. Whether the Nemenios were purchasers in good faith.
  3. Whether Article 1544 of the Civil Code applies to the case.
  4. Whether the award of attorney’s fees and litigation expenses to the Nemenios was proper.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Dispositive Portion

  1. Petitioner Severino Baricuatro, Jr. is declared the rightful owner of Lot Nos. 9 and 10.
  2. The deed of sale between Galeos and Amores is declared null and void as to Lot Nos. 9 and 10.
  3. The deed of sale between Amores and the Nemenios is declared null and void.
  4. The Register of Deeds is ordered to cancel the titles issued to Amores and the Nemenios and issue new titles in favor of petitioner.
  5. Respondents are ordered to pay attorney’s fees and litigation expenses to petitioner.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.