Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25775)
Facts:
Tomasita Bucoy v. Reynaldo Paulino, et al., G.R. No. L-25775, April 26, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Sanchez, J., writing for the Court.Plaintiff Tomasita Bucoy and defendant Reynaldo Paulino were married in 1936 and engaged jointly in buying and selling merchandise and used goods; with their savings they acquired seven parcels of land in Angeles, Pampanga (six lots purchased in 1960 and one in 1962) from Severina Realty Corporation. From 1961 the spouses began construction of Paulines Motel on six lots (opened July–August 1962); improvements and furnishings were obtained partly on credit, and Reynaldo borrowed from third parties, including intervenor Leopoldo Paulino, Tinio Lumber Company, Inc., and co-defendant Eufemia Bernardo.
During 1957–63 Reynaldo developed an extramarital relationship with Eufemia Bernardo, who assisted him in procuring loans from Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank (PCIB). Although the properties were primarily used and improved during the marriage, Torrens titles were taken out in Reynaldo’s name as “single,” and Bernardo advanced P105,000 to Reynaldo to cover construction and other needs. Reynaldo executed two deeds of sale in favor of Bernardo on June 18, 1963 (one covering six lots for P470,000 and one covering the seventh lot for P25,000), and on July 1, 1963 Bernardo executed a mortgage for P195,000 in favor of PCIB; a new deed of sale with explicit assumption of mortgages was executed July 5, 1963 and recorded on July 8, 1963 together with transfer of titles to Bernardo.
Upon learning of these transactions, Bucoy filed suit in the Court of First Instance of Pampanga on September 19, 1963 (Civil Case No. 2376) to annul the July 5, 1963 deed of sale with assumption of mortgages and to cancel titles issued in favor of Bernardo, invoking Article 173 of the Civil Code; Reynaldo filed a cross-claim against Bernardo seeking rescission for fraud and nonpayment. Intervenors included Leopoldo Paulino (and wife), Tinio Lumber Company, Inc., and PCIB (seeking payment of loans secured by mortgages). After trial the CFI rendered judgment on June 28, 1965 (with a supplemental decision of September 29, 1965) dismissing Bucoy’s annulment claim but gra...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Are the parcels and improvements conjugal property such that Tomasita Bucoy may attack the sales executed by Reynaldo Paulino?
- Is plaintiff Bucoy estopped from assailing the deed of sale of July 5, 1963 against Eufemia Bernardo?
- May Bucoy annul the deeds of sale in their entirety under Article 173 of the Civil Code when the husband executed them without her consent and they tend to defraud her interest?
- Were the conveyances and related transactions tainted by fraud or nonpayment so as to permit rescission or annulment by Reynaldo or annulment as to Bucoy?
- Is Philippine Commercial and Industrial Bank (PCIB) a good-faith mortgagee whose mortgages remain valid and subsisting on the properties?
- What are the proper remedies and restitution (poss...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)