Title
Source: Supreme Court
Heirs of Trazona vs. Heirs of Canada
Case
G.R. No. 175874
Decision Date
Dec 11, 2013
Heirs of Cipriano Trazona proved forgery of a 1956 deed, reclaiming ownership of Lot No. 5053-H from encroachers; SC annulled deed, ordered demolition, and awarded fees.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 256868)

Background of the Dispute

Cipriano acquired Lot No. 5053-H in 1940 and took possession, cultivated the land, and paid taxes diligently. In 1949, Dionisio purchased an adjacent parcel of land but encroached on a small section of Cipriano's lot. A confrontation ensued in 1952, where Cipriano refused Dionisio's offer to buy the encroached portion. Cipriano later allowed Dionisio to build a house on that portion temporarily, during which no legal action was taken against him until Cipriano's death in May 1982. After Cipriano's death, his son Hermogenes continued to cultivate the lot. The controversy arose in 1997 when petitioners found out that Tax Declaration No. 07764 for Lot No. 5053-H was canceled and replaced with Tax Declaration No. 23959 in Dionisio's name, based on the disputed Deed of Absolute Sale.

Procedural History

The petitioners filed a Complaint in July 1997 against the respondents for quieting of title, annulment of the deed of sale, cancellation of the new tax declaration, recovery of possession, and damages, asserting that the deed was a forgery. The respondents, on the other hand, claimed the deed was genuine and sought damages as a counterclaim. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) annulled the deed, citing evidence including the document examiner's opinion that Cipriano’s signature was forged and the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the property. The RTC also ordered the respondents to vacate the property.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals (CA), however, reversed the RTC’s decision, stating that the petitioners failed to prove the forgery allegation adequately. The CA observed that notarized documents enjoy a presumption of authenticity and it deemed that the document examiner did not ascertain the forgery with certainty. Furthermore, it noted that respondents had established possession of the lot since their house was built on it.

Issues Raised

The petitioners raised several issues in their Petition for Review on Certiorari, highlighting alleged errors by the CA, including the failure to overturn the presumption of regularity of the deed, the insufficient findings on forgery, and the issue of possession of Lot No. 5053-H.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court determined that the findings of fact from the RTC should be upheld given the discrepancies in the CA's conclusions. It highlighted the substantial evidence presented by the petitioners demonstrating the forgery of the deed. The document examiner's report was deemed credible, as it indicated significant differences betwe

...continue reading

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