Title
Toledo-Banaga vs. Damalerio
Case
G.R. No. 127941
Decision Date
Jan 28, 1999
Petitioners Banaga and Tan contested the CA's ruling affirming that private respondent Damalerio is the absolute owner of the disputed property, which led to an execution order for title issuance in Damalerio's name.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 127941)

Background of the Case

The Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Candelario Damalerio as the absolute owner of the disputed land, a decision affirmed by the Supreme Court. Despite this ruling, the Register of Deeds refused to issue new Certificates of Title in Damalerio's name, requiring the matter to be referred to an en consulta to secure the cancellation of Banaga’s title. This led to further legal proceedings, with Banaga's attempts to redeem the property through deposits to the trial court, ultimately challenged by Damalerio.

Redemption Actions and Judicial Proceedings

Initially, the trial court determined that Banaga had lost her right to redeem the property following the foreclosure. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals overturned this decision, allowing Banaga a period within which to complete the redemption, which she attempted by depositing the requisite amount financed by co-petitioner Tan. Nevertheless, the trial court's favorable order towards Banaga was later rescinded by the Court of Appeals, which reinstated Damalerio's ownership after finding that Banaga had failed to redeem within the stipulated time frame.

Conflict of Notices and Subsequent Actions

The dynamics of the case complicated when Banaga sold the property to Tan despite the ongoing disputes. Tan subdivided the property and sought new titles from the Register of Deeds, actions taken without judicial dispensation as the notices of lis pendens indicated the existence of prior litigation. These developments eventually led to Tan being named in Damalerio's certiorari petition.

Final Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals ultimately granted Damalerio's petition, nullifying the previous orders that confirmed Banaga's attempted redemption and directed the issuance of new titles in Damalerio's name. This order was upheld by the Supreme Court, effectively refraining from revisiting the already adjudicated matters due to res judicata principles.

Key Legal Principles: Res Judicata

The Supreme Court emphasized the principle of res judicata, which prohibits the re-litigation of issues that have been conclusively resolved by a competent court. The findings indicated that both previous judgments pertaining to the redemption and ownership were final and must prevail, hence preventing Banaga and Tan from contesting ownership again.

Bad Faith Acquisition

The ruling critically analyzed the actions of Jovita Tan, deeming her acquisition of the property as one conducted in bad faith. Given that she was aware of the lis pendens and the ongoing litigation, the Court reiterated that her claim of being a good faith purchaser could not succeed since she failed to undertake reasonable due diligence regarding the ownership of the property.

Possession Rights and Ministerial Functions

With the Court affirming Damalerio’s ownership, it also addressed the issue of possession, stating that the right is intrinsically linked to ownership. The Supreme Court concluded that t

...continue reading

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