Title
Lu vs. Spouses Manipon
Case
G.R. No. 147072
Decision Date
May 7, 2002
Dispute over 339-sqm lot ownership; SC ruled respondents had better right, petitioner was buyer in bad faith; ordered conveyance upon payment.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 147072)

Facts of the Case

The case stems from a dispute over ownership of a portion of a lot originally owned by Juan Peralta, who sold 350 square meters of a 2,078 square-meter lot to spouses Orlando and Rosita Manipon on an installment basis without registering the transaction. Subsequently, in 1981, Peralta mortgaged the entire lot to TSLAI. Upon default, the bank foreclosed on the property, which was then sold to Francisco H. Lu in 1988. Post-purchase, Lu subdivided the lot, creating Lot 5582-B-7-D, which overlapped with the area claimed by the Manipons.

In 1983, Peralta executed another sale deed to the Manipons, which was similarly unregistered. Despite this, the Manipons occupied the land and built a house, leading to eventual conflict when Lu sought recognition of his ownership. The Manipons contended that Lu bought the property with knowledge of their claim and presence on the land, arguing that he was thus a buyer in bad faith.

Ruling of the Trial Court

The trial court found that Lu was not a buyer in good faith, highlighting his awareness of the Manipons' occupancy and construction on the disputed land years prior to his purchase. The court ruled that knowledge of existing occupancy negated Lu's claims of ownership despite his subsequent registration of the title. It ordered Lu to convey the disputed lot to Rosita Manipon without requiring payment, due to the favorable and longstanding position of the Manipons as the effective occupants and partial owners through their dealings with Peralta.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision but modified it to relieve the Manipons from paying Lu for the disputed property. They reiterated that Lu was aware of the Manipons' claim during his purchase. The appellate court concluded that the registration of the title did not bestow him with a better right of ownership over the Manipons, given that he acted with knowledge of their claims.

Issues Presented

The primary issues raised by Lu related to:

  1. Determining who has a superior ownership right over Lot 5582-B-7-D.
  2. Assessing whether the Manipons' claim supersedes that of Peralta’s rights.
  3. Evaluating if the Manipons were estopped from asserting their claim due to lack of action to perfect their title.
  4. Analyzing Lu's state of mind regarding bad faith in acquiring the property.
  5. Addressing the proper valuation of the disputed land.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court found the Petition partially meritorious, ultimately siding with the appellate court's conclusions. It ruled that:

  • Although Lu registered his title first, he cannot claim priority given his knowledge of the Manipons' rights and possession.
  • Lu's alleged ignorance does not shield him from blame as he was aware of the situation surrounding the property.
  • Registration under the Torrens system does not automatically confer title in the presence of actual knowledge of defects in prior claims to the property.
  • Lu's failure to act cautiously led to his predicament, and he was thus not entitled t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.