Title
Spouses De Guzman vs. Agbagala
Case
G.R. No. 163566
Decision Date
Feb 19, 2008
The Supreme Court nullified the deed of donation and related property transfers, ruling that the certificate of title derived from an unauthorized free patent is void ab initio.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 163566)

Facts:

  • Petitioners: Raymundo and Perla de Guzman.
  • Respondent: Praxides J. Agbagala.
  • Background: Death of spouses Elias P. Javier (May 8, 1942) and Maria Sison (July 1936) in Lingayen, Pangasinan.
  • They left six children, including Praxides.
  • The siblings inherited 13 parcels of land, divided through an extrajudicial partition on June 29, 1948.
  • Five parcels were inherited by sister Carmen, who died single on February 25, 1984, without compulsory heirs.
  • In mid-1987, Rosing Cruz approached Milagros Agbagala Gutierrez, seeking to borrow P30,000 and presented a deed of donation dated January 25, 1977, allegedly signed by Carmen, transferring properties to her niece Madelene Javier Cruz.
  • Milagros verified the donation at the Register of Deeds, discovering it was registered, marking the first time Praxides learned of it.
  • Madelene claimed to have lived with Carmen since age four and received rentals from the properties.
  • On November 18, 1987, Praxides filed Civil Case No. 16516 against Madelene to nullify the deed of donation and subsequent property transfers.
  • An amended complaint was filed on September 15, 1988, including the petitioners who acquired land from Madelene.
  • Praxides alleged the deed was forged, supported by a handwriting expert from the National Bureau of Investigation.
  • Petitioners contended they applied for a free patent over the land and received Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. P-30187.
  • RTC ruled on May 30, 1996, declaring the deed null and void, canceling the deeds to the petitioners, and reverting properties to Carmen's estate.
  • CA affirmed this decision on October 14, 2003, and denied a motion for reconsideration on April 20, 2004.
  • Petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court ruled that the nullification of OCT No. P-30187 was correct, affirming t...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • A certificate of title is generally not subject to collateral attack; however, this principle does not apply when the title is based on a free patent that is null and void ab initio.
  • Petitioners argued that the amended complaint was filed after the title's issuance, claiming it could only be nullified through a direct attack.
  • The Court noted that the title was not yet indefeasible since less than one year had passed since its ...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.