Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. No. 166516 -

G.R. No. 166516 - EMMA VER REYES AND RAMON REYES, VS. IRENE MONTEMAYOR AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF CAVITE.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Cited Laws

RA 73,RA 719,RA 271,RA 408,RA 8,RA 331,RA 227,RA 396,RA 419,RA 350,RA 109,
Share:

Decision

Ruling

accordingly paid the taxes on the sale of the subject property. However, they were unable to register the sale and effect the transfer of the certificate of title to the subject property to their names. Petitioners claimed that they had consistently paid the real estate taxes on the subject property since their acquisition of the same in 1976 until 1991. In 1993, when they went to the Office of the Register of Deeds of Cavite to pay their real estate taxes for the years 1992 and 1993, they were informed that the subject property was sold by Marciano to private respondent on 10 November 1992, and TCT No. T-369793 covering it was issued in private respondent's name on 4 January 1993. Petitioners asserted that private respondent was able to cause the issuance of TCT No. T-369793 in her name by presenting a simulated and fictitious Deed of Absolute Sale dated 10 November 1992. The signatures of the sellers, spouses Virginia (Virginia) and Marciano Cuevas (spouses Cuevas), were forged in the said Deed. [6] Hence, petitioners prayed for the cancellation of TCT No. T-369793 in private respondent's name; the issuance of a new certificate of title in petitioners' names; the award of nominal damages of P50,000.00 and exemplary damages of P100,000.00, by reason of the fraud employed by private respondent in having the subject property registered in her name; the award of attorney's fees of not less than P50,000; and the costs of suit. [7] On 18 April 1994, private respondent filed with the RTC her Answer with Counterclaim, wherein she denied petitioners' allegation that the signatures of the spouses Cuevas in the Deed of Absolute Sale dated 10 November 1992 were forged. Private respondent averred that the subject property was offered to her for sale, but she did not disclose who actually made the offer. She discovered that there was no adverse claim or any kind of encumbrance annotated on the certificate of title of the spouses Cuevas covering the subject property. She had purchased the subject property for value and in good faith and had been in possession thereof. Private respondent insisted that she had a better title to the subject property, since she was the first registrant of its sale. Private respondent thus prayed for the award of moral damages in the amount of not less than P100,000.00 for the mental anguish, serious anxiety, and besmirched reputation she suffered by reason of the unjustified filing by petitioners of the case; the award of exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00 for petitioners' malicious filing of the case; and the award of attorney's fees, and costs of suit. [8] After the conduct of pre-trial, petitioners offered the testimonies of Marciano, petitioner Emma, and Carolyn Moldez-Pitoy (Carolyn). Marciano testified that he and his wife Virginia signed, on 8 October 1976, a Deed of Absolute Sale covering the subject property in petitioner Emma's favor. He denied selling the subject property to any other person, including priv