Title
Turla vs. Heirs of Dayrit
Case
G.R. No. 205743
Decision Date
Oct 6, 2021
Patrocinio Dayrit's heirs contested forged deeds of sale; Supreme Court upheld 1991 deed, ruling sale valid due to full payment and lack of forgery evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 205743)

Applicable Law

The resolution of the case is based on the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the Civil Code of the Philippines regarding sales and property ownership, and relevant jurisprudence governing the validity of documents and agreements.

Facts of the Case

The conflict arose from the complaint filed by the heirs of Patrocinio Dayrit, who alleged that the deeds of sale executed in 1979 and 1991 in favor of Rosalinda Turla were invalid. They asserted that Patrocinio, the original owner of the properties, did not authorize such sales and claimed that his signature on the relevant documents was forged. They sought the nullification of the said deeds, the return of the properties, and damages.

Judicial Proceedings

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a decision favoring the heirs, declaring the contested deeds as null and void. The RTC found that there was sufficient evidence suggesting fraud in the conveyance of the properties to the Turla family. The court noted irregularities surrounding the deeds, including the lack of Patrocinio's wife Rita's consent, which was necessary for the sale of conjugal properties under the Civil Code.

Conversely, the Turla family argued that they had entered into a Conditional Sale with Patrocinio, complied with its terms, and later received ownership through a valid Deed of Absolute Sale. They claimed that any inconsistencies regarding signatures or documents stemmed from a third party, Josie Tanhueco, whom they entrusted with the transfer process.

Court of Appeals Review

Upon appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA), the lower court's ruling was affirmed. The CA highlighted the dubious nature of the deeds of sale as foundational to the cancellation of the original titles and asserted that the heirs had not adequately proven the payment for the properties as claimed.

Petitioners' Arguments

In the petition for review, the Turla family contended that the CA overlooked certain facts that could undermine its conclusions. They argued that the presumption of regularity should apply to the notarized documents, and asserted they had fulfilled their financial obligations under the Conditional Sale. The Turla family criticized the CA's ruling against their deed based on findings that they claimed were mere conjectures.

Respondents' Arguments

The heirs of Patrocinio countered, asserting that the irregularities surrounding the deeds warranted their nullification. They elucidated that the presumption of regularity in public documents is rebuttable by evidence of fraud or inauthenticity, and maintained that the existence of conflicting deeds further supported their position.

Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court, in a departure from the lower courts' conclusions, determined that the Deed of Absolute Sale executed on January 11, 1991, was valid despite the surrounding doubts. The Court noted that the transaction had been acknowledged by Patrocinio in the deed itself and that numerous receipts substantiated the payments made by the Turla family. It ruled that faults attributed to third parties in handling the property transfer process should not invalidate the legitimate salable inte

...continue reading

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