Facts:

The case involves Zenaida M. Santos as the petitioner and private respondents Calixto Santos, Alberto Santos, Rosa Santos-Carreon, and Antonio Santos. The events leading to the case began with the ownership of a parcel of land registered under Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 27571, measuring 154 square meters, located in Sta. Cruz, Manila. This property was owned by spouses Jesus and Rosalia Santos, who had five children, including Salvador Santos, the deceased husband of Zenaida. On January 19, 1959, Jesus and Rosalia executed a deed of sale transferring the property to their children Salvador and Rosa, which resulted in the issuance of TCT No. 60819. Rosa later sold her share to Salvador on November 20, 1973, leading to the issuance of TCT No. 113221. Despite these transactions, Rosalia continued to manage the property and collect rent from tenants.

After the deaths of Jesus in 1979, Salvador in 1985, and Rosalia shortly thereafter, Zenaida, claiming to be Salvad...

Facts:

1. Family Background and Property Ownership

   • The spouses Jesus and Rosalia Santos owned a parcel of land registered under TCT No. 27571, located in Sta. Cruz, Manila, with a four-door apartment leased to tenants.
   • They had five children: Salvador, Calixto, Alberto, Antonio, and Rosa.

2. Transfer of Property

   • On January 19, 1959, Jesus and Rosalia executed a deed of sale transferring the property to their children Salvador and Rosa. TCT No. 27571 was replaced by TCT No. 60819.
   • On November 20, 1973, Rosa sold her share to Salvador, resulting in the issuance of TCT No. 113221 in Salvador's name.

3. Continued Control by Original Owners

   • Despite the transfer, Rosalia continued to lease the apartments and collect rentals. She also retained the owner's duplicate copy of the title.
   • Jesus died on November 1, 1979, followed by Salvador on January 9, 1985, and Rosalia in February 1985.

4. Dispute Over Ownership

   • Petitioner Zenaida M. Santos, Salvador's widow, demanded rent from a tenant, Antonio Hombrebueno, and filed an ejectment suit when he refused to pay.
   • Private respondents (Calixto, Alberto, Antonio, and Rosa) filed an action for reconveyance, alleging that the deeds of sale were simulated and lacked consideration.

5. Trial Court Decision

   • The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of private respondents, declaring the deeds of sale null and void and ordering the cancellation of TCT No. 113221 and TCT No. 60819.

6. Court of Appeals Decision

   • The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the deeds of sale did not confer ownership to Salvador as the original owners retained control and possession of the property.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

• (Unlock)

Ratio:

1. Ownership and Possession

   • Ownership is not transferred by mere execution of a deed of sale. Actual or constructive delivery, including control and possession, is required. The original owners' continued control and possession negated the validity of the sale.

2. Presumption of Delivery

   • The presumption of delivery arising from a public instrument can be rebutted by evidence showing the vendee did not take control or possession of the property.

3. Imprescriptibility of Void Contracts

   • Actions to declare a contract void or simulated do not prescribe. The right to reconveyance based on a void contract is imprescriptible.

4. Waiver of Dead Man's Statute

   • A party waives the protection of the Dead Man's Statute by failing to timely object to the testimony of a witness and by cross-examining the witness on matters occurring during the deceased's lifetime.