G.R. No. 192669 - RAUL F. SABERON, JR., JOAN F. SABERON AND JACQUELINE SABERON, VS. OSCAR VENTANILLA, JR., AND CARMEN GLORIA D. VENTANILLA.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Wherefore, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered in favour of plaintiffs, the spouses Oscar and Carmen Ventanilla, and against defendants MRCI, Krohn, Tabalingcos, Marquez and Saberon, as follows: (1) Declaring the Transfer Certificated of Title Nos. 55396 and 55397 in the name of Samuel Marquez, and Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 63140 and 63141 in the names of Raul, Jr., Joan and Jacqueline Saberon as null and void; (2) Ordering defendant MRCI to receive payment of the balance of the purchase price to be paid by the plaintiffs and to execute a Deed of Absolute Sale in favour of the plaintiffs, and in case of failure thereof, ordering plaintiffs to consign the amount with this Court; (3) Ordering the Register of Deeds to cancel the titles in the name of Marquez and the Saberons, and to issue new certificates of title in the name of the spouses Ventanillas upon registration of the Deed of Absolute Sale in favour of the plaintiffs or proof of their consignment; (4) Ordering defendant MRCI, Krohn, Tabalingcos and Marquez to pay plaintiffs, jointly and severally, the sums of: P100,000.00, as moral damages; and P50,000.00, as attorneys fees. (5) Ordering defendant MRCI, Krohn, Tabalingcos and Marquez to pay defendants Saberon, jointly and severally, the sum of P7,118,155.88 representing the value of the properties in dispute and the value of the improvements introduced by defendants Saberon; and (6) Ordering the defendants to pay the costs of the suit. Defendants counterclaims are hereby dismissed for lack of merit. Separate appeals were instituted by MRCI and Tabalingcos, on one hand, and the Saberons, on the other. The former contended that no fraudulent act could be attributed to them for the sale of the property to the title of Marquez, considering that ROD Cleofe was the one who inadvertently omitted the carrying over of the notice of levy to Marquez who consequently secured a clean title to the lot. MRCI Tabalingcos further claimed that the sale to Marquez was effected while the previous case was still pending, at a time when they had every liberty to believe in the legality of their position. Meanwhile, the Saberons relied on one central argumentthat they were purchasers in good faith, having relied on the correctness of the certificates of title covering the lots in question; and therefore, holders of a valid and indefeasible title. In the assailed decision, the CA made its conclusion hinged on the following findings: When MRCI executed a Contract to Sell in favor of Marquez in February 1990, it was in the throes of an appeal from the Decision in Civil Case No. 26411 where its very first Contracts to Sell to the Ventanillas were upheld over those of Crisostomo. The Marquez Contract to Sell was in fact the third in a row, and registered a year later, on May 21, 1991, appears as the first recorded entry in MRCIs titles. The notice of levy in Civil Case No. 26411 came ten days later, on May 31, 1991. Then, in February 1992, M