Case Digest (G.R. No. 133895)
Facts:
Zenaida M. Santos v. Calixto Santos, Alberto Santos, Rosa Santos-Carreon and Antonio Santos, G.R. No. 133895, October 02, 2001, Supreme Court Second Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Zenaida M. Santos is the widow and heir of Salvador Santos; respondents are Salvador’s siblings Calixto, Alberto, Antonio (all surnamed Santos) and Rosa Santos-Carreon. The property in dispute is a 154-square-meter parcel in Sta. Cruz, Manila originally registered under TCT No. 27571 in the names of spouses Jesus and Rosalia Santos, who leased out an apartment thereon.
On January 19, 1959 Jesus and Rosalia executed a deed of sale in favor of their children Salvador and Rosa, resulting in TCT No. 60819; Rosa later sold her share to Salvador on November 20, 1973, producing TCT No. 113221. Despite these transfers, Rosalia continued to collect rentals, keep the owner’s duplicate of the title, and pay realty taxes. Jesus died November 1, 1979; Salvador died January 9, 1985; Rosalia died in February 1985.
After Salvador’s death petitioner, claiming to be his heir, demanded rents from a tenant in December 1985; when refused, she successfully sued that tenant in an ejectment action before the Metropolitan Trial Court. On January 5, 1989, respondents filed an action for reconveyance with preliminary injunction in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, alleging the two deeds of sale were simulated and fictitious. Petitioner answered, asserting registration conferred ownership, and pleaded prescription, laches, and that the complaint failed to state a cause of action.
On March 17, 1993 the RTC (Branch 48) rendered judgment for respondents, declaring the 1959 and 1973 deeds of sale null and void as simulated, ordering cancellation of TCT Nos. 113221 and 60819 and reinstatement of TCT No. 27571 for partition among the heirs, and making the injunction permanent. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in a March 10, 1998 decision, holding that execution of a public instrument is not conclusive of delivery where the vendor retained possession and control, and that continued collection of rentals and retention of the tit...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Are payments of realty taxes and retention of possession indications of continued ownership by the original owners?
- Is a sale executed through a public instrument tantamount to delivery of the thing sold?
- Did the cause of action of Rosalia Santos and her heirs prescribe or is it barred by laches?
- Can petitioner invoke the "Dead Man’s Statute" (Rule 130, Sec. 23) to disqualif...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)