Case Summary (G.R. No. 161793)
Antecedents and Title Transactions
Gregorio Bagano owned Lot No. 1442-Q. His heir Florentino received a 390 sqm share, rented a 102 sqm portion to Atty. Parawan, who built a house and sold it (October 30, 1993) to petitioners. Upon Florentino’s death (1994), his sole heir Rosalita executed an Affidavit of Adjudication with Sale (March 15, 1994) conveying the 102 sqm to petitioners, who published and registered it, paid real property taxes, and possessed in the concept of an owner until 2001.
Respondent’s Claim and Litigation
Respondent presented two deeds from Spouses Florentino and Aurelia Bagano: May 8, 1989 (50 sqm) and November 17, 1989 (195 sqm). She asserted ownership, paid taxes (only in 2007), and filed ejectment against petitioners. She counterclaimed damages and attorney’s fees. Petitioners countered that the November 17 deed was simulated and sought its nullity, better right of possession, and injunction.
RTC Findings and Rationale
The RTC declared respondent’s 1989 deeds void and the 1994 affidavit valid, awarding petitioners co-ownership. It relied on:
- Doubtful execution of two deeds six months apart without proof of installment payment details or spousal consent for the first deed.
- Respondent’s delay in asserting ownership, collecting rent, or registering the deeds following Florentino’s death.
- Absence of the November 17, 1989 deed in the national archives.
- Testimony of a handwriting expert establishing forgery of Florentino’s signature.
- Petitioners’ good-faith registration and continuous possession under Act No. 3344.
Court of Appeals’ Disposition
The CA reversed, holding that:
- Respondent’s deeds, being notarized, enjoyed the presumption of regularity which petitioners failed to overthrow by clear, convincing evidence.
- Signature comparisons were identical and archive certification did not affect due execution.
- Payment of realty taxes supported ownership.
- Separate deeds for 50 sqm and 195 sqm were legitimate parcel sales.
- Art. 1544 on double sale did not apply to unregistered land; Act No. 3344 governed instead.
Issues for Review
- Whether the November 17, 1989 deed is spurious.
- If Art. 1544 (double sale) applies.
- Which party holds the superior right to the property.
Supreme Court Ruling
Under the 1987 Constitution, the SC found that the CA misappreciated facts and misapplied evidentiary presumptions. Exceptions allowing the SC to review factual findings applied because the CA conflicted with RTC findings and mischaracterized evidence. The SC held:
- Notarization of the November 17 deed was irregular—33 notarial books over eight months, implausible professional tax receipt volumes, and failure to file with archives—stripping its public-document status.
- Handwriting expert evidence and the Court’s independent comparison established clear, convincing proof of forgery of Florentino’s signature.
- Additional circumstances (lack of installment details, failure to notify lessees or register p
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 161793)
Facts
- Gregorio Bagano owned Lot No. 1442-Q (1,979 sqm) on Urgello Street, Cebu City.
- Upon his death, heir Florentino Bagano received 390 sqm (southern Urgello).
- Atty. Parawan rented Florentino’s lot, built a 102 sqm house, sold it to Dr. Enrique Hipolito, Sr., who in turn sold it to petitioners Rufino B. Requina, Sr. and Aurea U. EreAo under Deed of Sale dated October 30, 1993.
- Florentino died intestate in 1994. His sole heir, Rosalita Bagano Nevado, executed an Affidavit of Adjudication with Sale (March 15, 1994), transferring the 102 sqm where the house stood to petitioners for ₱100,000.
- Petitioners published the affidavit (Sun Star, April 5, 1994), registered it with the Register of Deeds, secured BIR clearance, and paid real property taxes from 1994 until a 2001 fire destroyed the house and claimed Aurea’s life.
- Petitioners then learned respondent Eleuteria B. Erasmo had presented Deeds of Sale dated May 8, 1989 (50 sqm) and November 17, 1989 (195 sqm) to the Register of Deeds.
Procedural Antecedents
- Petitioners filed Civil Case No. CEB-26877 (Regional Trial Court, Branch 9) for:
• Declaration of nullity of respondent’s Deed of Sale (Nov. 17, 1989)
• Better right of possession and ownership over the 102 sqm portion
• Preliminary injunction
• Moral/exemplary damages (≥ ₱50,000) and attorney’s fees (₱20,000) - Respondent answered, claiming valid installment purchases since 1985 and paying realty taxes since 1980; she counterclaimed for damages and attorney’s fees and filed ejectment.
Issues
- Whether the Deed of Sale dated November 17, 1989 is spurious.
- Whether Article 1544 (double sale) of the Civil Code applies.
- Which party has the better right to the subject portion of Lot No. 1442-Q.
RTC Ruling (June 17, 2009)
- Declared both Deeds of Sale in respondent’s favor (50 sqm + 195 sqm) void.
- Upheld the March 15, 1994 Affidavit of Adjudication as valid and binding.