Title
Tigno vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 110115
Decision Date
Oct 8, 1997
Dispute over land ownership in Lingayen, Pangasinan; implied trust established between brothers, with Eduardo as beneficiary. Casipits not purchasers in good faith; sale annulled.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 110115)

Facts of the Case

The case centers on three parcels of land in Lingayen, Pangasinan, owned by Bienvenido Sison, Remedios Sison, and the heirs of Isaac Sison. In early 1980, these owners appointed Dominador Cruz as their agent to sell the property. Rodolfo Tigno informed his brother, Eduardo Tigno, about the availability of these parcels and subsequently persuaded Eduardo to purchase them despite initial reluctance. An agreement was reached for the parcels to be sold at Ten Thousand Pesos each. Eduardo instructed Cruz to take the sellers to his ancestral home for the preparation of the deeds of sale but encountered legal obstacles that prevented the immediate execution of these documents.

Despite the failure to prepare the deed on the first scheduled date, Eduardo provided a down payment totaling Fifteen Thousand Pesos to the sellers, which was witnessed by Cruz and Attorney Modesto Manuel. Ultimately, deeding complexities led to Rodolfo being named as the buyer in the formal documents, enabling him to use the land as collateral for a loan. Subsequently, Rodolfo engaged in a sale of a portion of this land to the Spouses Casipit, who were aware that Eduardo, not Rodolfo, was the actual owner.

Procedural History

In May 1989, after learning of the sale executed by Rodolfo to the Casipits, Eduardo Tigno filed a complaint in Civil Case No. 16673 to seek reconveyance, annulment of the deed, recovery of possession, and damages against Rodolfo and the Casipits. The trial court ruled in favor of Rodolfo and the Casipits, but this decision was reversed by the Court of Appeals, which declared Eduardo as the rightful owner and the sale to the Casipits null and void.

Issues for Consideration

  1. Does the evidence support the existence of an implied trust between Rodolfo Tigno and Eduardo Tigno?
  2. Are the Spouses Casipit considered good faith purchasers of a portion of the land?

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision, rejecting the notion of Rodolfo as the actual buyer. It found that an implied trust existed, consistent with the provisions of Article 1448 of the Civil Code, which allows for trust relationships based upon the payment of the purchase price by one party while the title is taken in another's name.

Concept of Implied Trust

Implied trusts arise primarily when one party pays for property, but the title is conveyed to another. The essence of this case underscores a "resulting trust" where Rodolfo, in holding legal title to the property, was obligated to act for Eduardo's benefit. The Supreme Court ruled that the nature of their transaction and the mutual trust between brothers supports the existence of an implied trust, even in the absence of written agreements formally delineating this trust.

Findings on Good Faith

The claim that the Casipits acted in good faith in purchasing the land from Rodolfo was also dismissed. It was found that they were aware of Eduardo's ownership prior to the sale. Furthermore, since Ro

...continue reading

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