Title
Secuya vs. Vda. de Selma
Case
G.R. No. 136021
Decision Date
Feb 22, 2000
Petitioners claimed ownership of a 3,000-sqm lot via unregistered sale; respondent, a registered owner, prevailed due to lack of proof and good faith under Torrens system.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 136021)

Nature of the Case

The case involves a Petition for Review filed by the Secuya family against Gerarda M. Vda. de Selma. The action seeks to set aside a Decision by the Court of Appeals affirming the Regional Trial Court's dismissal of the Secuya’s Complaint for Quieting of Title and Cancellation of Certificate of Title of the Respondent.

Background Facts

The Secuya family contended ownership of a parcel of land located within Lot 5679 of the Talisay-Minglanilla Friar Lands Estate, alleging that this land was originally sold and titled to Maxima Caballero, who made agreements for its partition. They claimed that upon Maxima's death, her successors failed to honor these agreements, leading to their current ownership claims.

Conversely, the Respondent, Gerarda Selma, presented her title as a legitimate owner of portions of Lot 5679, having obtained these through legitimate sales from Cesaria Caballero and subsequent inheritance.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision that dismissed the Secuya's claims, maintaining that they failed to establish valid title to the property in question. The appellate ruling emphasized that the Secuya family’s claims were based on an Agreement of Partition, which was found to be invalid under the Public Land Act, which forbids such arrangements within a specified time post-issuance of patent.

Parts of the Dispute

The issues before the Court included the validity of the Agreement of Partition, the nature of the purported sale to Dalmacio Secuya, and the validity of the title held by the Respondent, Gerarda Selma.

Action for Quieting of Title

The Court clarified that, to successfully bring an action for quieting of title, the plaintiffs must demonstrate legal or equitable title to the real property and prove that any claims casting doubt on their title are indeed invalid. This requirement necessitates a clear and demonstrable ownership, which the Secuya family failed to provide against the fortified title of the Respondent.

Examination of the Agreement of Partition

The purported Agreement of Partition dated January 5, 1938, was deemed not a true partition but rather a trust agreement, as ownership had not been established amongst the parties. The absence of registration for this purported agreement rendered it ineffectual against third parties, which included Gerarda Selma.

Repudiation of the Trust

The failure of Maxima Caballero's heirs to execute the terms of the agreement and the absence of indications in land records constituted a repudiation of the trust, which barred any claims that arose from it over time.

Validity of the Sale to Dalmacio Secuya

Petitioners claimed that a sale occurred between Paciencia Sabellona and Dalmacio Secuya. However, they could not present definitive evidence of this transaction, as the purported document was 'lost'. In contrast, Gerarda Selma provided legitimate and recorded documentation linking her ownership to her purchases from heirs of the original landowner.

Petitioners' Failure to Assert Ownership Rights

While the Secuya family claimed continuous possessory rights, they failed to demonstrate that they exercised any indeed diligent ownership duties, such as registering the property, paying land taxes, or otherwise protecting t

...continue reading

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