G.R. No. 215820 - ERLINDA DINGLASAN DELOS SANTOS AND HER DAUGHTERS, NAMELY, VIRGINIA, AUREA, AND BINGBING, ALL SURNAMED DELOS SANTOS, VS. ALBERTO ABEJON AND THE ESTATE OF TERESITA DINGLASAN ABEJON.

Ruling

accordingly, ordered petitioners Erlinda Dinglasan-Delos Santos (Erlinda) and her daughters, Virginia, Aurea, and Bingbing, all surnamed Delos Santos (petitioners), to pay respondents Alberto Abejon and the estate of his spouse, Teresita Dinglasan-Abejon (Teresita; collectively, respondents) the aggregate amount of P2,200,000.00 plus legal interest, among others. The Facts The instant case arose from a Complaint for Cancellation of Title with collection of sum of money [5] filed by respondents against petitioners before the RTC. The complaint alleged that Erlinda and her late husband Pedro Delos Santos (Pedro) borrowed the amount of P100,000.00 from the former's sister, Teresita, as evidenced by a Promissory Note dated April 8, 1998. As security for the loan, Erlinda and Pedro mortgaged their property consisting of 43.50 square meters situated at 2986 Gen. Del Pilar Street, Bangkal, Makati City covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 131753 (subject land) which mortgage was annotated on the title. After Pedro died, Erlinda ended up being unable to pay the loan, and as such, agreed to sell the subject land to Teresita for P150,000.00, or for the amount of the loan plus an additional P50,000.00. On July 8, 1992, they executed a Deed of Sale and a Release of Mortgage, and eventually, TCT No. 131753 was cancelled and TCT No. 180286 was issued in the name of "Teresita, Abejon[,] married to Alberto S. Abejon." Thereafter, respondents constructed a three (3)-storey building worth P2,000,000.00 on the subject land. Despite the foregoing, petitioners refused to acknowledge the sale, pointing out that since Pedro died in 1989, his signature in the Deed of Sale executed in 1992 was definitely forged. As such, respondents demanded from petitioners the amounts of P150,000.00 representing the consideration for the sale of the subject land and P2,000,000.00 representing the construction cost of the three (3)-storey building, but to no avail. Thus, respondents filed the instant case. [6] In defense, petitioners denied any participation relative to the spurious Deed of Sale, and instead, maintained that it was Teresita who fabricated the same and caused its registration before the Register of Deeds of Makati City. They likewise asserted that Erlinda and Pedro never sold the subject land to Teresita for P150,000.00 and that they did not receive any demand for the payment of P100,000.00 representing the loan, as well as the P2,000,000.00 representing the construction cost of the building. Finally, they claimed that the improvements introduced by Teresita on the subject land were all voluntary on her part. [7] During the pre-trial proceedings, the parties admitted and/or stipulated that: ( a ) the subject land was previously covered by TCT No. 131753 in the name of Erlinda and Pedro, but such title was cancelled and replaced by TCT No. 180286 in the name of Teresita; ( b ) the Deed of Sale and Release of Mortgage executed on July 8, 1992 were forged, and