LUCIA EMBRADO and ORESTE TORREGIANI, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, PACIFICO CIMAFRANCA, MARCOS SALIMBAGAT, EDA JIMENEZ and SANTIAGO JIMENEZ.
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 51457
- Promulgated: 1994-06-27
- Ponente: Bellosillo, J.
Doctrine
In absence of proof of source of funds, there is a presumption that funds used for construction are conjugal.
A purchaser cannot close his eyes to facts which should put a reasonable person on guard; mere refusal to inquire defeats claim of good faith.
When property is in the possession of persons other than the seller, the buyer must investigate the rights of those in possession; failure to do so negates good faith.
Facts
Lot No. 564 (366 sqm) in Dipolog City was originally owned by the Carpitanos and a Venta Definitiva dated 2 July 1946 (retroactive to 15 April 1941) conveyed the lot to Lucia C. Embrado (soltera) (document in Spanish).
Petitioners Lucia Embrado and husband Oreste Torregiani challenge the validity of a Deed of Sale executed by Lucia in favor of Eda Jimenez which the Court of Appeals had upheld.
No evidence was presented on the source of funds for construction; nonetheless petitioners enjoy the presumption that such funds were conjugal.
Subsequent purchasers Marcos Salimbagat and Pacifico Cimafranca bought from Eda Jimenez but facts indicate they knew or should have known of defects in vendor’s title and of petitioners’ possession.
Issues
Whether Lot 564 was paraphernal property of Lucia Embrado or conjugal with her husband Oreste Torregiani.
Whether the sale in favor of Eda Jimenez was valid.
Whether vendees Marcos Salimbagat and Pacifico Cimafranca were buyers in good faith so that their purchases were valid and would bar reconveyance.
Ruling
Lot 564 is conjugal property; the sale by Lucia Embrado without her husband’s conformity is null and void.
Salimbagat and Cimafranca were purchasers in bad faith because they ignored facts that should have put them on inquiry; they are not entitled to Torrens protection.
The Court of Appeals decision of 26 April 1979 is reversed and set aside; the Court of First Instance decision of 14 June 1976 is reinstated and adopted.
Keywords
G.R. No. 51457, Declaration of Nullity of Contract, Annulment of Sales, Reconveyance, Damages, Venta Definitiva, Paraphernal Property, Conjugal Property, Absolute Deed of Sale, Mortgagee in Good Faith, Buyers in Bad Faith, Transfer Certificate of Title, Article 1496 Civil Code, Article 1498 Civil Code, Presumption of Conjugality, Lack of Consideration, Consent to Sale, Legal Interest, eda jimenez, lot 564