Title
Amerol vs. Bagumbaran
Case
G.R. No. L-33261
Decision Date
Sep 30, 1987
Two claimants vie for ownership of disputed land; one obtains title via fraud, leading to a Supreme Court ruling for reconveyance after ten years, invalidating the fraudulent title and mortgage.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-33261)

Legal Issue

This case revolves around the petition for review on certiorari concerning the prescriptive period for the action of reconveyance of real property wrongfully registered under another's name. The crux of the dispute concerns whether the prescriptive period for such an action is ten years, as asserted by the petitioners, or four years, as claimed by the respondent.

Court's Finding

The trial court found in favor of the respondent, holding that the petitioners' action had prescribed after four years from the issuance of the patent of the respondent. However, upon review, the current Court determined that the prescriptive period for reconveyance actions based on implied or constructive trusts is indeed ten years. The period is deemed to commence from the date of issuance of the certificate of title.

Facts of the Case

The property in question, designated as Lot No. 524, Pls-126, was the subject of dispute between the parties, where the respondent had obtained a Free Patent and a corresponding Original Certificate of Title for the land. Evidence showed that the petitioners, particularly Liwalug Datomanong, had continuous occupation and improvement of the land since 1952, whereas the respondent filed a patent for the same territory in a manner perceived as deceptive, leading to the issuance of a title in his name without lawful possession of the land.

Findings on Fraud and Misrepresentation

The Court noted that the respondent misrepresented his possession and occupancy of the property when applying for the Free Patent, creating an implied trust in favor of the actual possessor, Liwalug Datomanong. The findings indicated that the respondent's acquisition of title was through fraud, which necessitated reconveyance to the rightful possessor.

Application of Law

The core legal question involved interpreting the applicable provisions of the Civil Code. The Court cited Article 1456, which establishes that when property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the recipient is presumed to hold it in trust for the benefit of the rightful owner. Moreover, Article 1144 outlines that actions must be brought within ten years from when the right of action accrues, particularly applicable to the present case involving an action for reconveyance based on implied or constructive trust.

Analysis of the Trial Court's Error

The trial court's conclusion that the petitioners had a four-year period to assert their rights was fundamentally flawed. The final judgment of the higher court underscored that the applicable provisions of the Civ

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.