Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    1/18

    Republic of the Philippines

    SUPREME COURT

    Manila

    FIRST DIVISION

    G.R. No. !"#$ No%e&be' !() *((+

    RE,N-DO RODRIGUE/ an0 N-NC, -. RODRIGUE/) Petitione's)%s.

    CONCORDI- ONG IM) EURESTES IM -ND EMER IM) Respon0ents.

    D E C I S I O N

    C-E1O) SR.) 1.2

    3efo'e the Cou't is a petition fo' 'e%ie4 on ce'tio'a'i file0 b5 the spouses Re5nal0o an0Nanc5 Ro0'i6ue7 see8in6 the 'e%e'sal of the Decision 0ate0 1ul5 #) 99" of the Cou't

    of -ppeals in C-:G.R. CV No. *$;;(. The assaile0 0ecision affi'&e0 that of theRe6ional T'ial Cou't ect lots 4e'e 'e6iste'e0 inthe na&e of Do&in6a Go5&a on Feb'ua'5 +) 9;# un0e' TCT No. T:*#"$.

    Do&in6a Go5&a 0ie0 on 1ul5 9) 9$ an0 4as su'%i%e0 b5 he' onl5 son) Pablo Go5&ai&) 1'.) a spu'ious son ac8no4le06e0 an0 'eco6ni7e0 b5 he'.

    The co&plaint also alle6e0 that 0u'in6 he' lifeti&e) Do&in6a Go5&a eBclusi%el5possesse0 the sub>ect lots an0 upon he' 0eath) Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. succee0e0 to all he'

    'i6hts of o4ne'ship an0 possession. o4e%e') the spouses Ro0'i6ue7) 0espite thei'

    8no4le06e that Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.) 4as no4 the o4ne' an0 possesso' of the sub>ect

    lots) alle6e0l5 unla4full5 an0 f'au0ulentl5 &a0e it appea' that the5 ha0 pu'chase0 the

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    2/18

    sub>ect lots f'o& pe'sons 4ho 4e'e not the o4ne's the'eof.

    The spouses Ro0'i6ue7 alle6e0l5 cause0 the cancellation of TCT No. T:*#"$ 0espite thefact that the o4ne'?s 0uplicate cop5 the'eof 4as in the possession of Pablo Go5&a i&)

    1'. On Feb'ua'5 () 9$") TCT No. T:*#+(" 4as issue0 in the na&e of F'isco" Gu0ani)

    est'an6e0 husban0 of Do&in6a Go5&a. This title 4as cancelle0 b5 TCT No. T:*#+(+issue0 in the na&e of E0ua'0o Victa also on Feb'ua'5 () 9$". The latte' ce'tificate of

    title) in tu'n) 4as cancelle0 b5 TCT No. T:*#+($ issue0 in the na&e of the spouses

    Ro0'i6ue7 also on Feb'ua'5 () 9$".

    Since Ma5 9$") the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 alle6e0l5 t'ie0 to ente' an0 occup5 the sub>ect

    lots b5 fo'ce an0 inti&i0ation. Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. thus p'a5e0 in his co&plaint that the

    spouses Ro0'i6ue7 be pe'&anentl5 en>oine0 f'o& ente'in6 an0 occup5in6 the sub>ect lotsTCT No. *#+($ be 0ecla'e0 null an0 %oi0 an0 TCT No. T:*#"$ in the na&e of Do&in6a

    Go5&a be 'einstate0 an0 the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 be o'0e'e0 to pa5 Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.

    0a&a6es) atto'ne5?s fees an0 the costs of suit.

    In thei' -ns4e') the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 0enie0 the &ate'ial alle6ations in the co&plaint.

    The5 alle6e0 that Do&in6a Go5&a 4as not the &othe' of Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. The5a%e''e0 that the sub>ect lots 4e'e the con>u6al p'ope't5 of F'isco Gu0ani an0 his 4ife

    Do&in6a Go5&a. hen the latte' 0ie0) F'isco Gu0ani 4as he' sole su'%i%in6 hei'.

    -cco'0in6 to the spouses Ro0'i6ue7) F'isco Gu0ani an0 Do&in6a Go5&a) as husban0

    an0 4ife) >ointl5 eBe'cise0 acts of o4ne'ship an0 possession o%e' the sub>ect lots. hen

    Do&in6a Go5&a passe0 a4a5) F'isco Gu0ani eBecute0 an inst'u&ent of eBt'a:>u0icial

    settle&ent of the estate of the 0ecease0. 35 %i'tue of the sai0 0ocu&ent) Do&in6aGo5&a?s sha'e in the sub>ect lots 4as a0>u0icate0 in fa%o' of F'isco Gu0ani as he' sole

    su'%i%in6 hei'. The eBt'a:>u0icial settle&ent alle6e0l5 co&plie0 4ith the 'e@ui'e&ents of

    publication un0e' the Rules of Cou't.

    The'eafte') F'isco Gu0ani alle6e0l5 sol0 the sub>ect lots to E0ua'0o Victa 4ho) in tu'n)

    sol0 the sa&e to the spouses Ro0'i6ue7. The latte' clai&e0 that the5 4e'e pu'chase's in6oo0 faith an0 fo' %alue. Fu'the') the5 0enie0 that the5 ha0 t'ie0 to ente' the sub>ect lots

    b5 &eans of fo'ce an0 inti&i0ation. On the cont'a'5) the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 clai&e0 that

    the5 ha%e been in possession of the sub>ect lots b5 the&sel%es an0 thei' p'e0ecesso's:in:

    inte'est.

    -t the p'e:t'ial) the pa'ties stipulate0 on the follo4in6 facts2

    . that plaintiff Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.) the plaintiff in this case) is the sa&e pe'son

    &entione0 in the bi'th ce'tificate as Pablo Go ,&a) Be'oB cop5 of 4hich 4as sub&itte0

    0u'in6 the p'e%ious p'eli&ina'5 hea'in6) &a'8e0 as EBhibit H-H

    *. that Pablito Go5&a i& &entione0 in the In0i%i0ual Inco&e TaB Retu'ns of the

    0ecease0 Do&in6a Go5&a) Be'oB copies of 4hich 4e'e sub&itte0 0u'in6 the p'e%ious

    p'eli&ina'5 hea'in6 an0 &a'8e0 as EBhibits H3H) HCH an0 HDH an0 in the State&ent of

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    3/18

    -ssets an0 iabilities of the 0ecease0 Do&in6a Go5&a &a'8e0 as EBhibit HEH) 'efe's to

    the plaintiff Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.

    !. that acco'0in6 to plaintiff Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.) he is an ille6iti&ate chil0 othe' than

    natu'al of the 0ecease0 Do&in6a Go5&a

    ;. that the 0ecease0 Do&in6a Go5&a 0ie0 on 1ul5 9) 9$ an0 that at the ti&e of he'

    0eath) she 4as then the 'e6iste'e0 o4ne' of the t4o pa'cels of lan0 &entione0 in

    pa'a6'aph * of the co&plaint co%e'e0 b5 T'ansfe' Ce'tificate of Title No. T:*#"$ thatun0e' the afo'esai0 T'ansfe' Ce'tificate of Title) sai0 lan0s a'e 'e6iste'e0 in the na&e of

    Do&in6a Go5&a) 4ife of F'isco Gu0ani

    ". that at the ti&e of the 0eath of Do&in6a Go5&a) plaintiff Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.) 4asthen &o'e than thi't5:fi%e ect lots issue0 in the

    na&e of Do&in6a Go5&a Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.?s Ce'tificate of 3i'th ect p'ope't5 pai0 b5 PablitoGo5&a i&) 1'.

    Fo' thei' pa't) the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 p'esente0 the follo4in6 0ocu&enta'5 e%i0ence2Dee0 of -bsolute Sale 0ate0 Feb'ua'5 !) 9$" ect lots issue0 in the na&e of the spouses

    Ro0'i6ue7 on Feb'ua'5 () 9$" TCT No. T:*#+(+

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    4/18

    lots issue0 in the na&e of E0ua'0o Victa on Feb'ua'5 () 9$" TCT No. T:*#+("

    u6al 04ellin6 since then. e 8no4s that Do&in6a Go5&a is

    no4 0ea0. e 8no4s too that Pablo Go5&a i& is the son of the late Do&in6a Go5&a.

    is state&ent in his -ffi0a%it) 0ate0 1une *") 9$+ ect of this case. On the affi0a%it) 0ate0 Ma'ch

    ") 9$! u0icatin6 unto hi&self the p'ope't5 state0 the'ein)

    inclu0in6 the t4o pa'cels of lan0 sub>ect of this case) he eBplaine0 that sai0 affi0a%it 4asp'epa'e0 b5 -tt5. -le>an0'o 3. -6uilan) 4ho &ust ha%e 8no4n about the p'ope'ties left

    b5 Do&in6a Go5&a an0 &a0e hi& un0e'stan0 that he is inhe'itin6 the th'ee

    that if he 4ill not si6n the 0ocu&ent) the p'ope'ties 4ill 6o to the 6o%e'n&ent an0)

    because he 0i0 not 4ant these p'ope'ties to 6o to the 6o%e'n&ent) he si6ne0 the affi0a%itin o'0e' to 6et the p'ope'ties. a0 it been eBplaine0 to hi& that these p'ope'ties 4ill not

    be fo'feite0 in fa%o' of the 6o%e'n&ent) he 4ill not si6n the affi0a%it. The fi'st ti&e -tt5.

    -6uilan tol0 hi& about the p'ope'ties of Do&in6a Go5&a 4as about t4o 5ea's afte' he'0eath. -tt5. -6uilan 4ent to hi& in his 'esi0ence in Pa6bilao) Aue7on an0 tol0 hi& that if

    he 4ill not a6'ee to 6et the p'ope't5 of Do&in6a Go5&a) those p'ope'ties 4ill 6o to the

    6o%e'n&ent. -tt5. -6uilan tol0 hi& that because he ha0 not cont'ibute0 an5thin6 in the

    ac@uisition of sai0 p'ope'ties) his sha'e is one:fou'th. On Ma'ch ") 9$!) -tt5. -6uilan&a0e hi& si6n a p'epa'e0 petition fo' the issuance of a secon0 o4ne'?s 0uplicate cop5 of

    T'ansfe' Ce'tificate of Title No. T:*#"$

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    5/18

    of Do&in6a Go5&a) but -tt5. -6uilan tol0 hi& to 'ecei%e onl5 P()(((.(( because the

    P()(((.(( 4ill be use0 to co%e' the eBpenses of liti6ation. Of the P()(((.(( left)

    P")(((.(( 4as 6i%en to hi& an0 the othe' P")(((.(( 4as ta8en b5 -tt5. -6uilan) as the5a'e sha'e an0 sha'e ali8e in the P()(((.((. e eBplaine0 that 4hen he si6ne0 the 0ee0 of

    sale) he 4as &a0e to un0e'stan0 that he 4as sellin6 onl5 the one:fou'th sha'e of the

    p'ope't5 that he o4ns an0 the p'ice fo' the one:fou'th sha'e is P*()(((.((. On the0ocu&ent entitle0 HDEED OF -3SOUTE S-E OF RE- PROPERT,)H 0ate0

    1anua'5 $) 9$" u06&ent infa%o' of Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. an0 a6ainst the spouses Ro0'i6ue7. In suppo't of its

    conclusions) the cou't a @uo &a0e the follo4in6 factual fin0in6s2

    Do&in6a Go5&a &a''ie0 F'isco Gu0ani on Ma'ch **) 9**. o4e%e') afte' li%in6to6ethe' fo' onl5 ele%en

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    6/18

    coul0 then &a8e his o' he' o4n li%in6 4ithout the inte'%ention an0 'esponsibilit5 of the

    othe'.

    Un0e' this state of life that 4e ha%e) li%in6 sepa'atel5) an0 upon 'e@uest that I 6'ant he' a

    &a'ital consent) b5 these p'esents I 0o he'eb5 6i%e an0 6'ant unto &5 4ife) Do&in6a Go

    I&co I&a) full po4e' an0 autho'it5 an0 consent to 0o an0 pe'fo'& an5 an0 e%e'5 act an0thin6 4hatsoe%e' 'e@uisite) necessa'5 o' p'ope' to be 0one in 4hate%e' she &a5 un0e'ta8e

    to 0o in 4hich un0e' the la4 in fo'ce an0 in these Islan0 &5 p'esence an0 pe'sonal

    inte'%ention is necessa'5) as full5 to all intents an0 pu'poses as I &i6ht o' coul0 0o ifp'esent an0 inte'%enin6 in pe'son) an0 speciall5 the follo4in6 acts2

    To bu5 o' sell) hi'e) lease o' &o't6a6e) lan0s o' buil0in6s) an0 othe' fo'&s of 'eal

    p'ope't5) upon such te'&s an0 con0itions) an0 un0e' such co%enants as &5 4ife &a50ee& p'ope'

    To pu'chase an0 sell) hi'e o' ple06e) 6oo0s) 4a'es) &e'chan0ise) chattels) choses in

    action) an0 othe' fo'&s of pe'sonal p'ope't5 that a'e o' &a5 co&e into he' possession aso4ne' o' othe'4ise

    To bo''o4 o' len0 &one5s) 4ith o' 4ithout secu'it5) upon such te'&s an0 con0itions as

    she &a5 app'o%e an0 to t'ansact an5 an0 all business) ope'ations an0 affai's 4ith an5

    institution as &a5 be 0ee&e0 p'ope' an0 con%enient b5 he'

    To &a8e) si6n) eBecute an0 0eli%e' cont'acts) 0ocu&ents) a6'ee&ents) 0ee0s an0 othe'

    4'itin6s of 4hatsoe%e' natu'e) 8in0 an0 0esc'iption) 4ith an5 an0 all pe'sons) conce'ns)

    an0 entities) upon te'&s an0 con0itions acceptable to he'

    To p'osecute an0 0efen0 an5 an0 all suits) actions an0 othe' p'ocee0in6s in the cou'ts)

    t'ibunals) 0epa't&ents an0 offices of the Go%e'n&ent of the Philippine Islan0s) an0 tote'&inate co&p'o&ise) settle an0 a0>ust the sa&e.

    I 0o he'eb5 'enounce an5 an0 all 'i6hts) title) inte'est an0 pa'ticipation) 'i6hts of actions)if an5 I ha%e) in connection 4ith the p'ope'ties) 'eal o' pe'sonal) that &5 4ife &i6ht ha%e

    ac@ui'e0 b5 pu'chase) eBchan6e) o' othe'4ise) f'o& an5 pe'son f'o& the ti&e 4e 4e'e

    sepa'ate0) in 9*;) an0 to all that she &a5 ac@ui'e in the futu'e.

    In consi0e'ation of all that is p'o%i0e0 abo%e in this &a'ital consent) an0 in consi0e'ation

    of the 'enunciation &a0e b5 &5 husban0) I) Do&in6a Go I&co I&a) he'eb5 a6'ee also to

    'enounce an5 an0 all 'i6hts) title) inte'est an0 pa'ticipation) an0 also an5 'i6ht of action)that I &a5 ha%e in connection 4ith an5 p'ope't5) 'eal o' pe'sonal) ac@ui'e0 o' 4hich &a5

    be ac@ui'e0 b5 &5 husban0 since 4e 4e'e sepa'ate0 in 9*;) an0 that an5 0ebts o'

    obli6ations incu''e0 o' 4hich &a5 be incu''e0 b5 &e since 4e 4e'e sepa'ate0 in 9*;)an0 in the futu'e pu'suant to this &a'ital consent) a'e &5 sole 0ebts an0 obli6ations in

    4hich &5 husban0 can ha%e no 'esponsibilit5.

    IN ITNESS EREOF) 4e to6ethe' ha%e he'eunto si6ne0 ou' na&es belo4 as si6ns

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    7/18

    of ou' confo'&it5 4ith the thin6s &entione0 abo%e) at Pa6bilao) Ta5abas) P.I.) on this

    9th 0a5 of Ma'ch) 9!*.

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    8/18

    cohabite0 4ith each othe' as co&&on la4 husban0 an0 4ife. The5 ha0 a son) Pablo

    Go5&a i&) 1'. 4ho 4as bo'n on Ma'ch *#) 9!".

    On Dece&be' !) 9;") as e%i0ence0 b5 a Dee0 of -bsolute Sale ect lots an0 institute0 the'ein astenants Do&ina0o' To''es) o'eto Estopace an0 Si&eon Estopace. 3efo'e she passe0

    a4a5 on 1ul5 9) 9$) Do&in6a Go5&a 6a%e TCT No. T:*#"$ to he' son) Pablo Go5&ai&) 1'.) 4ho i&&e0iatel5 too8 possession of the sub>ect lots.

    T4o an0'o D. -6uilan 4ent to seeF'isco Gu0ani in Pa6bilao) Aue7on) an0 info'&e0 the latte' about the p'ope'ties)

    inclu0in6 the sub>ect lots) left b5 the 0ecease0. -tt5. -6uilan falsel5 &a0e F'isco Gu0ani

    to belie%e that if he 4oul0 not ac@ui'e the p'ope'ties fo' hi&self) the sa&e 4oul0 be

    fo'feite0 in fa%o' of the 6o%e'n&ent. F'isco Gu0ani 4as then pe'sua0e0 b5 -tt5. -6uilanto affiB his si6natu'e on the follo4in6 0ocu&ents2 ect lots ect lots 4e'e a0>u0icate0 in fa%o' of F'isco Gu0ani an0 the secon0 o4ne'?s

    0uplicate cop5 of TCT No. T:*#"$ 4as obtaine0) -tt5. -6uilan li8e4ise &a0e the fo'&e'si6n the Dee0 of Con0itional Sale of P'ope't5 0ate0 Septe&be' () 9$; co%e'in6 the

    sub>ect lots in fa%o' of E0ua'0o Victa. The t4o pa'ties to the inst'u&ent ne%e' &et each

    othe' an0 it 4as onl5 -tt5. -6uilan 4ho 4as p'esent 4hen F'isco Gu0ani si6ne0 thesa&e. The nota'5 public befo'e 4ho& the5 suppose0l5 ac8no4le06e0 the sa&e 4as not

    p'esent.

    Fo' the sai0 pu'po'te0 sale) F'isco Gu0ani 'ecei%e0 P")(((.(( onl5 because) acco'0in6 to

    -tt5. -6uilan) he 0i0 not cont'ibute an5thin6 to the ac@uisition of the sub>ect lots.

    The'eafte') F'isco Gu0ani 4as &a0e to si6n b5 -tt5. -6uilan a Dee0 of -bsolute Sale

    0ate0 1anua'5 $) 9$" t'ansfe''in6 the sub>ect lots to E0ua'0o Victa.

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    9/18

    Fo' a ti&e) the sub>ect lots continue0 to be co%e'e0 b5 TCT No. T:*#"$ in the na&e of

    Do&in6a Go5&a. On Feb'ua'5 !) 9$") as e%i0ence0 b5 the Dee0 of -bsolute Sale

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    10/18

    the sub>ect lots. Mo'eo%e') these 4e'e ac@ui'e0 b5 Do&in6a Go5&a afte' he' 0e facto

    sepa'ation f'o& F'isco Gu0ani. The estate left b5 the 0ecease0) inclu0in6 the sub>ect lots)

    shoul0 ha%e fi'st been pa'titione0 in an app'op'iate estate p'ocee0in6 to 0ete'&ine thoseentitle0 the'eto. ithout the sai0 p'ocee0in6 o' p'io' the'eto) F'isco Gu0ani coul0 not la5

    %ali0 clai&) if he ha0 an5) o%e' the sub>ect lots as sole hei' an0 he coul0 not ha%e been the

    o4ne' the'eof 4ho coul0 le6all5 t'ansfe' o4ne'ship b5 &eans of sale.

    The 0ec'etal po'tion of the Decision 0ate0 Ma5 $) 99( of the cou't a @uo 'ea0s2

    EREFORE) p'e&ises consi0e'e0) >u06&ent is he'eb5 'en0e'e0 in fa%o' of the

    substitute0 plaintiffs) CONCORDI- ONG IM) EURESTES IM an0 EMER IM an0

    a6ainst the 0efen0ants) the spouses RE,N-DO RODRIGUE/ an0 N-NC, -.

    RODRIGUE/) as follo4s2

    a= Decla'in6 as null an0 %oi0 all t'ansactions 'elati%e to the p'ope'ties in @uestion

    sub&itte0 to the Re6iste' of Dee0s fo' the P'o%ince of Aue7on on Feb'ua'5 () 9$"

    b= Decla'in6 T'ansfe' Ce'tificate of Title No. T:*#+($ in the na&e of 0efen0ants as null

    an0 %oi0 an0 o'0e'in6 the 'einstate&ent of T'ansfe' Ce'tificate of Title No. T:*#"$ in thena&e of HDOMING- GO,M-) of a6e) the 4ife of F'isco Gu0ani)H plaintiffs?

    p'e0ecesso':in:inte'est

    c= O'0e'in6 the 0efen0ants to i&&e0iatel5 %acate the p'e&ises of the p'ope'ties sub>ect of

    this liti6ation

    0= O'0e'in6 the 0efen0ants to pa5 to the plaintiffs the a&ount of P*;)(((.(( as atto'ne5?sfees an0

    e= O'0e'in6 the 0efen0ants to pa5 the costs.

    SO ORDERED.*

    -66'ie%e0) the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 file0 an appeal 4ith the Cou't of -ppeals 4hich

    'en0e'e0 the assaile0 Decision 0ate0 1ul5 #) 99" affi'&in6 in toto the 0ecision of the

    cou't a @uo. The appellate cou't substantiall5 affi'&e0 the factual fin0in6s an0 conclusion

    of the cou't a @uo. It st'esse0 that Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. 4as the son of the 0ece0entDo&in6a Go5&a as e%i0ence0 b5 a %olunta'5 ac8no4le06&ent &a0e in his 'eco'0 of

    bi'th ect lots befo'e pa'tition of the estate of Do&in6a Go5&a an0 4ithout

    autho'it5 6i%en b5 Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.

    On the &atte' of 4hethe' the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 pu'chase0 the sub>ect lots in 6oo0 faith

    an0 fo' %alue) the appellate cou't 'ule0 in the ne6ati%e) as 'eco'0 4as 'eplete 4ith

    e%i0ence 0isp'o%in6 thei' clai& of 6oo0 faith. Re>ectin6 the a'6u&ent p'offe'e0 b5 the

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    11/18

    spouses Ro0'i6ue7) the appellate cou't hel0 that F'isco Gu0ani an0 E0ua'0o Victa 4e'e

    not in0ispensable pa'ties because the5 4e'e not in possession of the sub>ect lots an0 thei'

    inte'ests the'ein 4e'e infe'io' an0 i''ele%ant to) an0 coul0 not affect) the 'i6ht of PabloGo5&a i&) 1'. to a 0esi6nate0 po'tion of the sub>ect lots b5 inhe'itance f'o& his &othe'

    Do&in6a Go5&a.

    The 0ec'etal po'tion of the appellate cou't?s 0ecision 'ea0s2

    PREMISES CONSIDERED) the 0ecision appeale0 f'o& is he'eb5 -FFIRMED.

    SO ORDERED.;

    The spouses Ro0'i6ue7 file0 a &otion fo' 'econsi0e'ation 4hich the appellate cou't0enie0 in the assaile0 Resolution 0ate0 Octobe' ") 99#.

    Fo'th4ith) the spouses Ro0'i6ue7

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    12/18

    TE VENDEES OF TE SU31ECT PROPERTIES) PRISCO GUD-NI -ND

    EDU-RDO VICT-) NOT 3EING INDISPENS-3E P-RTIES) TE, ERE

    PROPER, NOT IMPE-DED -S DEFEND-NTS IN TE COMP-INT."

    The petition is be'eft of &e'it.

    Petitione's assail the filiation of Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. statin6 that he 4as not 0ul5

    ac8no4le06e0 o' 'eco6ni7e0 b5 eithe' of his pa'ents. This contention is e''oneous. It is

    aBio&atic that factual fin0in6s of the t'ial cou't) especiall5 4hen affi'&e0 b5 theappellate cou't) a'e conclusi%e an0 bin0in6 on the Cou't.+ In this case) the cou't a @uo

    an0 the appellate cou't a'e in a6'ee&ent that) base0 on the e%i0ence p'esente0) Pablo

    Go5&a i&) 1'. 4as the ille6iti&ate an0 ac8no4le06e0 son of Do&in6a Go5&a.

    The Cou't has lai0 0o4n the &anne' of establishin6 the filiation of chil0'en) 4hethe'

    le6iti&ate o' ille6iti&ate) as follo4s2

    The filiation of ille6iti&ate chil0'en) li8e le6iti&ate chil0'en) is establishe0 b5

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    13/18

    It shoul0 be 'ecalle0 that -tt5. -6uilan &a0e F'isco Gu0ani affiB his si6natu'e on) a&on6

    othe' 0ocu&ents) a Petition 0ate0 Ma'ch ") 9$! file0 4ith the Cou't of Fi'st Instance ofthe P'o%ince of Aue7on fo' the issuance of a secon0 o4ne'?s 0uplicate cop5 of TCT No.

    T:*#"$ an0 an -ffi0a%it of oss 0ate0 Ma'ch ") 9$! fo' the loss of the o4ne'?s

    0uplicate cop5 of TCT No. T:*#"$. Ob%iousl5) these 0ocu&ents containe0 falsehoo0sbecause TCT No. T:*#"$ 4as ne%e' lost an0) in fact) ha0 been in the possession of

    Do&in6a Go5&a 0u'in6 he' lifeti&e an0) 4hen she passe0 a4a5 on 1ul5 9) 9$) in the

    possession of Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'.

    It has been consistentl5 'ule0 that H4hen the o4ne'?s 0uplicate ce'tificate of title has not

    been lost) but is in fact in the possession of anothe' pe'son) then the 'econstitute0

    ce'tificate is %oi0) because the cou't that 'en0e'e0 the 0ecision ha0 no >u'is0iction.Reconstitution can %ali0l5 be &a0e onl5 in case of loss of the o'i6inal ce'tificate.H# In

    such a case) Hthe 0ecision autho'i7in6 the issuance of a ne4 o4ne'?s 0uplicate ce'tificate

    of title &a5 be attac8e0 an5 ti&e.H9

    -ppl5in6 this 'ule) it is appa'ent that the secon0 o4ne'?s 0uplicate cop5 of TCT No. T:

    *#"$ issue0 upon the petition of F'isco Gu0ani 4as %oi0. Fu'the') the ce'tificates of titleect lots) inclu0in6 thei' ac@uisition the'eof. State00iffe'entl5) petitione's cannot clai& that the5 4e'e pu'chase's in 6oo0 faith an0 fo' %alue

    because the t'ansactions in%ol%in6 the sub>ect lots 4e'e so 'eplete 4ith ba06es of f'au0

    an0 i''e6ula'ities that shoul0 ha%e put the& on 6ua'0 about the 0efects in the 'especti%e

    titles of F'isco Gu0ani an0 E0ua'0o Victa.

    To 'ecall) TCT No. T:*#"$ 4as cancelle0 an0) in lieu the'eof) TCT No. T:*#+(" 4as

    issue0 in the na&e of F'isco Gu0ani) on Feb'ua'5 () 9$". The latte' 4as the'eafte'cancelle0 b5 TCT No. T:*#+(+ issue0 in the na&e of E0ua'0o Victa also on Feb'ua'5

    () 9$". The latte' ce'tificate of title) in tu'n) 4as cancelle0 b5 TCT No. T:*#+($

    issue0 in the na&e of the spouses Ro0'i6ue7 also on Feb'ua'5 () 9$". These hi6hl5i''e6ula' t'ansfe's of o4ne'ship) i.e.) cancellation an0Lo' issuance of ce'tificates of title)

    in%ol%in6 the sub>ect lots all t'anspi'in6 on the sa&e 0ate elo@uentl5 bet'a5 the f'au0 that

    atten0e0 the t'ansactions) inclu0in6 petitione's? ac@uisition the'eof. It is ce'tainl5 unli8el5

    that petitione's ha0 no 8no4le06e of these f'au0ulent t'ansactions.

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    14/18

    Petitione's? clai& of bein6 pu'chase's in 6oo0 faith an0 fo' %alue 4as 0ebun8e0 b5 the

    cou't a @uo) thus2

    Defen0ant spouses) un0e' the p'e&ises) cannot a%ail of the p'otecti%e &antle of la4

    p'otectin6 a pu'chase' fo' %alue an0 in 6oo0 faith) as the5 a'e not pu'chase's fo' %aluean0 neithe' ha%e the5 acte0 in 6oo0 faith. Defen0ants cannot successfull5 put up a pictu'e

    of innocence as to the f'au0 that cha'acte'i7e0 the t'ansactions 'elati%e to thei' ulti&ate

    ac@uisition of the p'ope'ties sub>ect of this liti6ation. Defen0ant Re5nal0o Ro0'i6ue7 4as4ell a4a'e that on his ac@uisition of the p'ope'ties) Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. 4ill file suit

    a6ainst hi& that is 4h5 he 'etaine0 P()(((.(( of the pu'chase p'ice) 4hich a&ount is

    inten0e0 to be use0 in the eBpecte0 liti6ation. In fact) 0efen0ant Re5nal0o Ro0'i6ue7

    a0&itte0 to F'isco Gu0ani that he pu'chase0 the p'ope'ties at a %e'5 lo4 p'ice because of4hich he p'o&ise0 to 6i%e F'isco Gu0ani an a00itional a&ount of P)"((.(( upon the

    te'&ination of the case.**

    On this point) the appellate cou't succinctl5 state0 that Has to the contention thatappellants ect &atte' of the suit an0 in the 'elief sou6ht a'e so ineBt'icabl5

    inte't4ine0 4ith the othe' pa'ties? that his le6al p'esence as a pa't5 to the p'ocee0in6 is anabsolute necessit5. In his absence the'e cannot be a 'esolution of the 0ispute of the pa'ties

    befo'e the cou't 4hich is effecti%e) co&plete) o' e@uitable.

    Con%e'sel5) a pa't5 is not in0ispensable to the suit if his inte'est in the cont'o%e's5 o'sub>ect &atte' is 0istinct an0 0i%isible f'o& the inte'est of the othe' pa'ties an0 4ill not

    necessa'il5 be p'e>u0ice0 b5 a >u06&ent 4hich 0oes co&plete >ustice to the pa'ties in

    cou't. e is not in0ispensable if his p'esence 4oul0 &e'el5 pe'&it co&plete 'eliefbet4een hi& an0 those al'ea05 pa'ties to the action o' 4ill si&pl5 a%oi0 &ultiple

    liti6ation.*;

    - final 0ete'&ination coul0 be ha0 in the co&plaint fo' cancellation of TCT No. T:

    *#+($ an0 in>unction e%en 4ithout E0ua'0o Victa an0 F'isco Gu0ani. Onl5 the

    petitione's a'e in0ispensable pa'ties the'ein an0 thei' insistence that E0ua'0o Victa an0

    F'isco Gu0ani shoul0 li8e4ise be i&plea0e0 0ese'%es scant consi0e'ation.

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    15/18

    a%in6 establishe0 that petitione's? TCT No. T:*#+($ e&anate0 f'o& a %oi0 0ocu&ent)

    i.e. the secon0 o4ne'?s 0uplicate cop5 of TCT No. T:*#"$ p'ocu'e0 b5 F'isco Gu0anian0Lo' -tt5. -6uilan th'ou6h f'au0 an0 4hen Do&in6a?s o4ne'?s 0uplicate ce'tificate of

    title ha0 not been lost) an0 that petitione's 4e'e not pu'chase's in 6oo0 faith an0 fo'

    %alue) the Cou't conclu0es that the nullification of petitione's? TCT No. T:*#+($ is4a''ante0 un0e' the ci'cu&stances. The appellate cou't the'efo'e co&&itte0 no 'e%e'sible

    e''o' in affi'&in6 the 0ecision of the cou't a @uo 4hich) a&on6 othe's) 0ecla'e0 as null

    an0 %oi0 TCT No. T:*#+($ in the na&e of petitione's an0) instea0) 'einstate0 TCT No.T:*#"$ in the na&e of Do&in6a Go5&a) &othe' of Pablo Go5&a i&) 1'. u'is0iction.*"

    EREFORE) the petition is DENIED. The Decision 0ate0 1ul5 #) 99" an0

    Resolution 0ate0 Octobe' ") 99# of the Cou't of -ppeals in C-:G.R. CV No. *$;;( a'e-FFIRMED in toto.

    SO ORDERED.

    ROMEO 1. C-E1O) SR.

    -ssociate 1ustice

    E CONCUR2

    -RTEMIO V. P-NG-NI3-NChief 1ustice

    Chai'pe'son

    CONSUEO ,N-RES:S-NTI-GO-ssociate 1ustice M-. -ICI- -USTRI-:M-RTINE/

    -ssociate 1ustice

    MINIT- V. CICO:N-/-RIO-ssociate 1ustice

    C E R T I F I C - T I O N

    Pu'suant to Section !) -'ticle VIII of the Constitution) it is he'eb5 ce'tifie0 that the

    conclusions in the abo%e 0ecision 4e'e 'eache0 in consultation befo'e the case 4as

    assi6ne0 to the 4'ite' of the opinion of the Cou't?s Di%ision.

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    16/18

    -RTEMIO V. P-NG-NI3-N

    Chief 1ustice

    Footnotes

    Penne0 b5 -ssociate 1ustice E&ete'io C. Cui

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    17/18

    -RT. 9+(. e6al o' intestate succession ta8es place2

  • 8/12/2019 Rodriguez Et Al. vs. Martinez Et Al.

    18/18

    *" Natche' %. Cou't of -ppeals) ;# Phil. ++9) +$$