G.R. No. 149906 - SPOUSES HORACIO AND FELISA BENITO, VS. AGAPITA SAQUITAN-RUIZ.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, foregoing considered, the present appealed Order is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Plaintiff-appellants (1) [C]omplaint dated April 8, 1999 is REINSTATED; (2) Motion for Leave to Admit Amended Complaint is hereby GRANTED; and (3) Amended Complaint dated July 21, 1999 is hereby ADMITTED. The case is hereby ordered REMANDED x x x to the trial court for further proceedings. [2] Reconsideration of the assailed Decision was denied in the assailed Resolution. [3] The Facts The facts of the case are undisputed. On April 1, 1999, Respondent Agapita Saquitan-Ruiz filed against Petitioner-Spouses Horacio and Felisa Benito a civil suit for specific performance with declaration of nullity of titles and damages. The Complaint alleged that the couple had sold in her favor Lot 1-B-2 of Subdivision Plan (LRC) Psf-28352 located in Pasig City. Despite repeated demands, they failed to deliver or cause the issuance of a new certificate of title in her name. Specifically, the Complaint stated, inter alia , as follows: 3. On April 17, 1979 defendant Horacio Benito, with his wife defendant Felisa Benitos marital consent, sold to plaintiff, her heirs and successors-in-interest for and in consideration of the amount of Six Thousand (P6,000.00) Pesos with the receipt of said amount duly acknowledged by defendant Horacio Benito to his entire and complete satisfaction, and further warranting the latters quiet and clean title, that parcel of land consisting of 60 square meters, more or less, located at Capasigan, Pasig City, Lot 1-B-2 of the subdivision plan (LRC) Psf-286352 under Transfer Certificate of Title No. 17136-T-86-D-II of the Registry of Deeds of Pasig City x x x. 4. Defendants are legally obliged to cause the issuance of and/or deliver a new title under plaintiffs name by virtue of the parties deed of absolute sale but they failed to do so; 5. Despite repeated demands, both verbally and in writing, and the long period of time that has lapsed, defendants failed and refused and up to the present still fail and refuse to cause the issuance and/or delivery of the corresponding certificate of title in favor of the plaintiff to the latters great damage and prejudice x x x. 6. It turned out that instead of issuing and/or delivering to the [respondent] her certificate of title over the above-described parcel of land, [petitioners], in gross bad faith and with fraudulent intent, re-subdivided the whole parcel of land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 17136/T-86-D-II from the original THREE (3) lots; Lot I-B-1 consisting of 80 square meters, Lot I-B-3 consisting of 60 square meters, and [petitioners] Lot I-B-2 consisting of 60 square meters into FIVE (5) lots; x x x x x x x x x 8. [Petitioners] bad faith and fraudulent intent in causing the issuance under [Petitioner] Horacio Benitos name of Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. PT-101743, PT-101744, PT-101745, PT-101746, and PT-101747 thereby also including therein in undetermined porti