Case Digest (G.R. No. 224083-84)
Facts:
In Domingo D. Rubias v. Isaias Batiller (G.R. No. L-35702, May 29, 1973), plaintiff-appellant Domingo D. Rubias, a lawyer, sued defendant-appellee Isaias Batiller before the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Iloilo in 1964 to recover ownership and possession of portions of Lot under Psu-99791 in Barrio General Luna, Barotac Viejo, Iloilo. Rubias claimed he purchased 144.9072 hectares from his father-in-law, Francisco Militante, by a 1956 deed of sale recorded in 1960. Militante’s original application (Land Case No. R-695, G.L.R.O. No. 54852) to register title over 171.3561 hectares was dismissed by the land registration court in 1952 and that dismissal was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in 1958. In 1964, CFI Iloilo had already dismissed an ejectment suit brought by Rubias on the ground that Batiller “had a better right to possess” the land, having been in actual possession under a claim of title long before Militante’s 1956 sale. At pre-trial in the present case, the parties stCase Digest (G.R. No. 224083-84)
Facts:
- Background and parties
- Plaintiff-appellant Domingo D. Rubias, a lawyer, purchased portions of a parcel of untitled land (144.9072 ha) in Barrio General Luna, Barotac Viejo, Iloilo, described under Plan Psu-99791.
- Defendant-appellee Isaias Batiller claimed Lot No. 2 under Plan Psu-155241 and asserted actual, open, public, continuous and peaceful possession under claim of title since 1945.
- Stipulated facts at pre-trial (Dec. 9, 1964)
- Survey and land registration case
- Francisco Militante surveyed 171.3561 ha on July 18–31, 1934 (Plan Psu-99791) and filed Land Case No. R-695 for registration; the Court of First Instance dismissed the application on Nov. 14, 1952, and on Sep. 22, 1958 the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. No. 13497-R) affirmed the dismissal.
- Deed of sale and tax declarations
- On June 18, 1956, Militante sold 144.9072 ha to Rubias (Deed Exh. A; recorded July 14, 1960, Entry No. 13609).
- Tax Declarations for the land were made by Militante (1940–1949), Rubias (1957–1964), Liberato Demontano (prior to 1940), and Batiller (1945; revised 1960), with corresponding tax payments.
- Possession and prior ejectment proceedings
- Rubias filed a forcible entry and detainer case on April 22, 1960 (Exh. 4); the Justice of the Peace and Municipal Courts ruled for Batiller (May 10, 1961), and on Nov. 26, 1964 the Iloilo CFI dismissed Rubias’s complaint, holding Batiller had a better right to possess under Plan Psu-155241.
- Procedural history
- Rubias’s complaint for recovery of ownership, possession, damages and attorneys’ fees was filed Aug. 31, 1964; Batiller answered with counterclaim for moral damages (P2,000) and attorneys’ fees (P500).
- Pre-trial order recorded stipulated facts (10 in paragraph A) and reserved limited points of evidence (paragraphs B and C).
- On Aug. 17, 1965, Batiller moved to dismiss under Arts. 1409(7) and 1491(5) of the Civil Code, arguing the June 1956 sale to his lawyer was inexistent and void.
- The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the complaint on Oct. 18, 1965; it denied reconsideration on Jan. 14, 1966.
- Rubias appealed; the Court of Appeals certified two pure legal questions to the Supreme Court.
Issues:
- Whether the sale in June 1956 by Francisco Militante to his counsel-son-in-law, Domingo Rubias, of land then in litigation and under appeal was void ab initio under Article 1491(5) in relation to Article 1409(7) of the Civil Code.
- Whether the trial court erred in entertaining Batiller’s motion to dismiss after answer and pre-trial, when factual and documentary matters had been fully stipulated.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)