Facts:
Shirley B. Nuega was married to
Rogelio A. Nuega on September 1, 1990; prior to the marriage, Rogelio purchased a house and lot in Marikina on September 13, 1989 for P102,000 and the Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 171963 was issued on October 19, 1989 in his name alone. While engaged and working in Israel in 1988, Shirley sent money to Rogelio for the purchase and later, upon her return, claimed to have paid the balance and succeeding amortizations through SSS financing. Shirley and Rogelio lived in the subject property after marriage, but Shirley learned that Rogelio had brought another woman into the home and filed two actions in 1992, one for concubinage and another for legal separation and liquidation of property; the RTC of Pasig City, Branch 70, granted the petition for legal separation on May 16, 1994, dissolved the community property and enjoined Rogelio from disposing of community property pending liquidation. Despite this, Rogelio sold the property to
Josefina V. Nobleza by a Deed of Absolute Sale dated December 29, 1992 for P380,000, and Nobleza assumed an existing mortgage; Shirley testified that she warned neighbors, including Nobleza's sister, against buying the property because of the pending cases. Shirley filed a complaint for rescission of sale and recovery of property on August 27, 1996 before the RTC of Marikina City, Branch 273, which on February 14, 2001 rescinded the sale insofar as Shirley’s one-half share and ordered reconveyance or payment of market value and attorney’s fees; the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 70235 affirmed with modification on May 14, 2010 by declaring the Deed of Absolute Sale null and void in its entirety and ordering reconveyance of the entire property to Shirley and Rogelio, and denied Nobleza’s motion for reconsideration on July 21, 2010; Nobleza petitioned this Court for certiorari which resulted in the present decision dated March 11, 2015.
Issues:
Was petitioner
Josefina V. Nobleza a purchaser in good faith? Was the Court of Appeals erroneous in modifying the trial court decision by declaring the Deed of Absolute Sale dated December 29, 1992 null and void in its entirety?
Ruling:
Ratio:
Doctrine: