G.R. No. 136021 - Secuya vs. Vda. de Selma

The petitioners are Benigna Secuya, Miguel Secuya, Marcelino Secuya, Corazon Secuya, Rufina Secuya, Bernardino Secuya, Natividad Secuya, Gliceria Secuya, and Purita Secuya.
The respondent is Gerarda M. vda. de Selma.
The action is a petition to quiet title, whereby the petitioners seek to remove the cloud allegedly caused by the respondent’s title over a disputed parcel of land.

The property in dispute is a 3,000‑square‑meter portion of Lot No. 5679 of the Talisay-Minglanilla Friar Lands Estate.
Lot No. 5679, covering an area of approximately 12,750 square meters, has been subject to multiple transactions and is evidenced by various sale certificates and deeds.
The property was originally sold and a patent issued to Maxima Caballero, from which subsequent agreements and transfers emanated.

During her lifetime, Maxima Caballero executed an Agreement of Partition dated January 5, 1938, with Paciencia Sabellona.

The document purportedly provided for the transfer of one‑third of Lot No. 5679 in favor of Paciencia Sabellona.
The agreement was phrased as a partition but, in substance, it represented an express trust for the benefit of Paciencia Sabellona.

Paciencia Sabellona allegedly took possession of her portion and it is claimed that she sold the 3,000‑square‑meter portion to Dalmacio Secuya on October 20, 1953, for P1,850.00.

A private deed was said to evidence the sale but was later lost.
A Deed of Confirmation of Sale executed by Ramon Sabellona was introduced to ratify this transaction, though its probative value was questioned.

Dalmacio Secuya, predecessor‑in‑interest of the petitioners, took physical possession, cultivated the land, and after his death in 1961, his heirs (the petitioners) continued to occupy the property.
In 1972 and later, further developments occurred:

Edilberto Superales, who married into the Secuya family, constructed a house on the land in January 1974, with the property boundaries verified by a Certification dated August 10, 1985.
In February 1975, Gerarda Selma purchased a substantial portion of Lot No. 5679 (9,302 square meters) evidenced by a notarized Deed of Sale and recorded under TCT No. T‑35678.
The disputed 3,000‑square‑meter portion is encompassed within this acquisition.

Petitioners contend that they possess an interest in the property through the Agreement of Partition and the subsequent purported sale (and its confirmation) to Dalmacio Secuya.
They argue that the respondent’s title, evidenced by a registered TCT, creates a cloud over their purported rights.
The respondent, on the other hand, asserts that her title is valid and unencumbered, tracing back to the sale documented in February 1975.
The action for quieting title is premised on the need to remove any purported cloud arising from conflicting interests.

Petitioners maintained possession of the disputed lot for several decades. However, they did not take steps to register the Agreement of Partition, secure the necessary tax payments, or otherwise fortify their claim.
Their inaction allowed multiple sales and transfers to occur, including the sale to respondent Selma, who then acquired her title under the Torrens system.
The case eventually reached the Regional Trial Court, was affirmed by the Court of Appeals, and culminated in the present petition for review.

Whether there was a valid transfer or conveyance of the one‑third portion of Lot No. 5679 from Maxima Caballero to Paciencia Sabellona by virtue of the Agreement of Partition dated January 5, 1938.
Whether the nature of the document, being essentially an express trust rather than a partition, undermines its efficacy as a basis for claiming title.

Whether petitioners, as heirs claiming under the Agreement and the purported sale to Dalmacio Secuya, have demonstrated the requisite legal or equitable title necessary to avail themselves of the remedy under Article 476 of the Civil Code.
Whether petitioners’ failure to enforce their rights—through proper registration and payment of land taxes—affects their standing in an action to quiet title.

Whether Gerarda Selma’s acquisition and registration of title under the Torrens system should be upheld, especially given the principle that a purchaser is entitled to rely on the certificate of title unless there is actual notice of adverse claims.
Whether the trial and appellate courts erred by not characterizing respondent Selma as a bad‑faith purchaser in light of petitioners’ longstanding possession of the land.