Case Digest (G.R. No. 190823)
Facts:
Domingo Carabeo v. Spouses Norberto and Susan Dingco, G.R. No. 190823, April 04, 2011, Supreme Court Third Division, Carpio Morales, J., writing for the Court.On July 10, 1990, Domingo Carabeo (petitioner) executed a written agreement entitled “Kasunduan sa Bilihan ng Karapatan sa Lupa” to sell his rights over an unregistered parcel in Purok III, Tugatog, Orani, Bataan (described in the agreement as measuring 27 x 24 meters and containing two santol and one mango tree) to Spouses Norberto and Susan Dingco (respondents) for P38,000. The respondents paid P10,000 upon signing and were to pay the balance in September 1990. Respondents later averred that when they tendered the balance petitioner asked them to keep it for a time because of a “squabble” over the land; respondents thereafter made additional payments totaling P9,100 in smaller installments. Respondents claimed they later offered the remainder, but petitioner refused, stating he would register the land first; petitioner in turn alleged respondents failed to pay the September 1990 balance and that he accepted only P9,100 in installments.
In 1994 respondents learned the land had been registered in petitioner’s name on December 21, 1993 (TCT No. 161806). After an unsuccessful barangay conciliation, respondents filed a complaint for specific performance in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 1, Balanga, Bataan. Petitioner answered asserting, inter alia, that the sale was void for lack of a certain object (no metes and bounds), and that respondents’ failure to pay the balance made the action premature.
Trial on the merits was concluded and the case was submitted for decision. Petitioner died on January 31, 2001; the records do not show that his counsel notified the trial court or effected substitution under Section 16, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court. By Decision dated February 25, 2001, the RTC ordered petitioner to sell his rights over the 648 sq. m. parcel and to execute a deed of sale upon payment of P18,900, and assessed costs against him. A Notice of Appeal was filed by petitioner’s counsel on March 20, 2001.
The Court of Appeals, in a decision penned by Associate Justice Jose C. Reyes and promulgated July 20, 2009, affirmed the RTC’s decision. Its denial of reconsideration was resolved January 8, 2010. Antonio Carabeo, petitioner’s son, filed the present Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari contesting, inter alia, (A) that the contract lac...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the death of petitioner after submission of the case but before final judgment render respondents’ action dismissible or otherwise divest the trial court of authority to proceed?
- Is the “Kasunduan sa Bilihan ng Karapatan sa Lupa” void for lack of an object certain?
- May respondents’ failure to judicially consign the balance of the purchase price bar their action for specific performance?
- Was the lack of spousal consent a ground to invalidate the sale wher...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)