Case Digest (G.R. No. L-49686)
Facts:
Felix Gochan & Sons Realty Corporation v. Vicente Canada, substituted by Mona Lisa Ma. Reyes, G.R. No. L-49686, August 31, 1988, Supreme Court First Division, Grino‑Aquino, J., writing for the Court.The dispute concerns Lot No. 6733, an unregistered 2.5‑hectare parcel in Cebu City. In 1939 Juan Jabutay sold an undivided one‑half pro indiviso interest in the lot to Eustaquio Paraiso, who later (1951) sold his one‑half to Vicente Canada. Canada filed Civil Case No. R‑1630 (partition) against Jabutay on July 31, 1951; the trial court rendered judgment on July 5, 1957 declaring co‑ownership and ordering partition. Canada appealed to the Court of Appeals (docketed CA‑G.R. No. 22909‑R).
While the appeal was pending, and without notifying Canada, Jabutay applied for Torrens registration of the entire lot; OCT No. 51 issued to him on March 2, 1959. On April 22, 1959 Jabutay sold the entire lot to Felix Gochan & Sons Realty Corporation (“Gochan”), which received TCT No. 19612 and took possession. Canada thereafter filed Civil Case No. R‑6130 (April 30, 1959) against Jabutay and Gochan seeking annulment of the sale and cancellation of Gochan’s title; a notice of lis pendens was annotated on Gochan’s title on February 12, 1962.
On June 18, 1964 the Court of Appeals affirmed the partition judgment in CA‑G.R. No. 22909‑R. Canada’s counsel moved for substitution on behalf of his daughter, Mona Lisa Ma. Reyes, and the Court of Appeals on June 2, 1966 ordered Reyes substituted as plaintiff and later (July–September 1966) directed the inclusion of the heirs of Felix Gochan and eventually Felix Gochan & Sons Realty Corporation as additional defendants. Gochan sought relief by certiorari in G.R. No. L‑26627, which the Supreme Court dismissed (minute resolution, Oct. 10, 1966).
Procedural skirmishes followed: the trial court in the R‑6130 annulment action dismissed that case on February 6, 1969 after Reyes moved for dismissal claiming substitution in the partition suit. Reyes then pursued execution of the affirmed partition judgment (Civil Case No. R‑1630). The Court of Appeals by resolution (Aug. 26, 1970) authorized inclusion of Gochan as defendant and directed issuance of a writ of execution against it; the trial court issued an alias writ on October 13, 1970, appointed commissioners (Feb. 6, 1971), and approved their partition report on June 10, 1971, dividing the property and ordering delivery of one‑half to the plaintiff’s successor. Gochan appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA‑G.R. No. 49278‑R), which affirmed the RTC order on December 19, 1978.
Gochan then filed a petition for review on certiorari with this Court (Rule 45). The S...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals have jurisdiction to implead Felix Gochan & Sons Realty Corporation as an additional defendant and thereby bind it long after its judgment in CA‑G.R. No. 22909‑R had become final?
- Does the partition judgment in Civil Case No. R‑1630 bind Gochan, a subsequent purchaser of the whole lot who acquired a Torrens title for value without no...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)