Title
Rufino B. Requina, Sr., Duly Substituted by Erlinda K. Requina and Allan Ereao, Duly Represented by Leny Ereao vs. Eleuteria B. Erasmo
Case
G.R. No. 221049
Decision Date
Dec 7, 2022
Dispute over 102-sqm property; petitioners' ownership upheld as respondent's 1989 deed deemed spurious, petitioners' 1994 affidavit valid.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 221049)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Lot and Inheritance
    • Gregorio Bagano owned Lot No. 1442-Q (1,979 sqm) in Cebu City.
    • Upon his death, Florentino Bagano inherited a 390 sqm residential portion.
  • Chain of Title and Improvements
    • Atty. Lawrence Parawan rented Florentino’s 390 sqm lot and built a house on a 102 sqm portion.
    • Parawan sold the house to Dr. Enrique Hipolito, Sr., who on October 30, 1993 executed a Deed of Sale conveying it to petitioners Rufino B. Requina, Sr. and Aurea U. EreAo.
  • Adjudication and Possession by Petitioners
    • Florentino died intestate in February 1994; his sole heir, Rosalita Bagano Nevado, executed on March 15, 1994 an Affidavit of Adjudication with Sale conveying the 102 sqm portion to petitioners for ₱100,000.
    • The affidavit was published (Sun Star Daily, April 5, 1994), registered with the Register of Deeds, and petitioners paid property taxes and maintained continuous possession until a fire in 2001 destroyed the house.
  • Respondent’s Competing Claim
    • Eleuteria B. Erasmo claimed she bought 50 sqm from Florentino by installment (Deed of Sale May 8, 1989) and another 195 sqm from Spouses Florentino and Aurelia Bagano (Deed of Sale November 17, 1989) for ₱75,000.
    • The November 17, 1989 deed was not found in the National Archives, and she only declared and paid taxes on the lot in 2007. She filed ejectment in May 2001.
  • Procedural History
    • Petitioners filed Civil Case No. CEB-26877 (2001) for nullity of respondent’s deed, better right to possession, and preliminary injunction.
    • RTC Branch 9 (June 17, 2009) ruled for petitioners, voided respondent’s deeds, and upheld petitioners’ affidavit.
    • CA (Decision Feb. 26, 2015; Resolution Sept. 23, 2015) reversed, upholding respondent’s deeds as regular and valid, rejecting forgery claims, and finding double-sale rule inapplicable.

Issues:

  • Validity of the November 17, 1989 Deed of Sale
    • Was the deed properly notarized and genuine?
    • Was the signature of Florentino forged?
  • Applicability of Article 1544 (double sale rule) to immovable property
  • Which party holds the better right to possession and ownership of the 102 sqm portion

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.