Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that upon the filing of this complaint, a restraining order be issued enjoining defendants from selling, disposing or otherwise encumbering the property subject of this case; after due hearing, a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction be issued in the same tenor as that of the restraining order; and after trial on the merits, judgment be rendered in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants: a) Making the writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction per…
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that upon the filing of this complaint, a restraining order be issued enjoining defendants from selling, disposing or otherwise encumbering the property subject of this case; after due hearing, a writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction be issued in the same tenor as that of the restraining order; and after trial on the merits, judgment be rendered in favor of plaintiff and against the defendants: a) Making the writ of preliminary prohibitory injunction permanent; b) Ordering defendants to immediately and without delay, deliver to plaintiff the possession of and the transfer certificate of title over the remaining area of that parcel of land they sold to plaintiff; c) Ordering defendants to pay plaintiff, jointly and severally, the following sums: P 500,000.00 representing opportunity loss; P 50,000.00 for and as attorneys fees; P 20,000.00 for and as expenses of litigation; and P 50,000.00 for and as moral, exemplary, temperate and nominal damages. Other reliefs, just and equitable under the premises, are likewise prayed for. [34] Lagon testified that Josefina failed to deliver the title to the property he purchased from her, as well as the possession thereof; hence, he was not certain of the metes and bounds of the property and could not secure a building permit for the transfer and construction of the Rural Bank of Isulan, as well as the commercial building. Besides, Carlos, Jr. secured his permission for the construction of the PCIB commercial building on Lot No. 3-C-2 which was sold to him by Josefina, and even agreed to the deduction of the purchase price thereof; hence, the balance was only P 26,880. Lagon demanded that the title to the property be turned over to him and the occupants thereof be evicted therefrom so that he could comply with the conditions of the sale for the construction of the commercial building and the transfer of the Isulan Rural Bank. However, Carlos, Jr. dilly-dallied, saying that the heirs of Carlos, Sr. needed time to execute the extrajudicial settlement of his estate, and thus failed to deliver said title to him. Lagon averred that his consent to the construction by the PCIB of its branch on a portion of the property he had purchased from Josefina constituted substantial compliance of his undertaking under the deed of absolute sale and the affidavit he executed in favor of Josefina. He also alleged that he signed the affidavit prepared by Carlos, Jr. without reading and understanding the same. He pointed out that although Lot No. 3 had already been sold to him by Josefina, she still sold Lot No. 3-C-3 to her son, Carlos, Jr.; Lot No. 3-D to Engr. Rolendo Delfin; and mortgaged Lot No. 3-D to DBP which acquired title over the property. In their answer to the complaint, Josefina and her son, the defendants therein, alleged that Lagon had no cause of action against them because he failed to comply with the terms of the deed of absolute sale, his undertaking under his affidavit,
G.R. No. 127206 - PERLA PALMA GIL, VICENTE HIZON, JR., AND ANGEL PALMA GIL, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HEIRS OF EMILIO MATULAC, CONSTANCIO MAGLANA, AGAPITO PACETES & THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF DAVAO CITY.
G.R. No. 127206 -
CaseG.R. No. 103577 - ROMULO A. CORONEL, ALARICO A. CORONEL, ANNETTE A. CORONEL, ANNABELLE C. GONZALES (FOR HERSELF AND ON BEHALF OF FLORAIDA C. TUPPER, AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT), CIELITO A. CORONEL, FLORAIDA A. ALMONTE, AND CATALINA BALAIS MABANAG, VS. THE COURT OF APPEALS, CONCEPCION D. ALCARAZ AND RAMONA
G.R. No. 103577 -
CaseG.R. No. 176791 - COMMUNITIES CAGAYAN, INC., VS. SPOUSES ARSENIO (DECEASED) AND ANGELES NANOL AND ANYBODY CLAIMING RIGHTS UNDER THEM.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 176791 -