Case Digest (G.R. No. 165088)
Facts:
In Potenciano Ramirez vs. Ma. Cecilia Ramirez (G.R. No. 165088, March 17, 2006), petitioner Potenciano Ramirez filed on October 8, 1996, before the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City a complaint seeking the annulment of a Deed of Donation, a Waiver of Possessory Rights, and Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. T-5618 and T-5617 allegedly executed in respondent Ma. Cecilia Ramirez’s favor. Petitioner alleged that respondent procured the Deed of Donation dated January 29, 1993 and the Waiver of Possessory Rights dated October 24, 1995, together with his and his deceased wife Dolores’s signatures, to cancel TCT Nos. T-4575 and T-4576 and secure new titles in her name, and to transfer tax declarations on the improvements. However, Dolores died on April 5, 1991, thus rendering her signature forged; petitioner likewise disclaimed his own signatures as unauthorized. Respondent contended that the documents were prepared at petitioner’s behest to economize on publication and inheritancCase Digest (G.R. No. 165088)
Facts:
- Procedural Background
- On October 8, 1996, petitioner Potenciano Ramirez filed before the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City (RTC) a complaint for annulment of:
- Deed of Donation;
- Waiver of Possessory Rights; and
- Transfer Certificates of Title (TCT) Nos. T-5618 and T-5617.
- Petitioner challenged respondent Ma. Cecilia Ramirez’s acquisition of the land and improvements covered by TCT Nos. T-4575 and T-4576, alleging the execution of the aforementioned documents caused cancellation of the old titles and issuance of new ones in respondent’s name, as well as the transfer of tax declarations in respondent’s favor.
- Material Facts
- The Deed of Donation bore the date January 29, 1993, and the Waiver of Possessory Rights October 24, 1995; yet petitioner’s wife, Dolores Ramirez, died on April 5, 1991, hence could not have signed either document.
- Petitioner repudiated the signatures attributed to himself and his wife, asserting lack of intent to transfer the properties.
- Respondent’s Answer claimed that petitioner, despite his advanced age, had himself proposed the donation and waiver to save on publication and inheritance taxes.
- The RTC found:
- Dolores’s signature on the Deed of Donation was a forgery, but genuine on the Waiver;
- Petitioner’s signatures on both were genuine; and
- Petitioner and respondent were in pari delicto under Civil Code Article 1412, dismissing the complaint.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the forgery of Dolores’s signature on both documents and upheld the pari delicto ruling, dismissing petitioner’s appeal.
Issues:
- Whether petitioner and respondent are in pari delicto, and if so, under which provision of the Civil Code (Article 1411 or 1412) they must be barred from relief.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)