Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, the dispositive part of the original DECISION of this case, promulgated on November 19, 2001, is SET ASIDE and another one is entered AFFIRMING in part and REVERSING in part the judgment appealed from, as follows: “1. Declaring [Respondent] Romana de Vera the rightful owner and with better right to possess the property in question, being an innocent purchaser for value therefor; “2.
WHEREFORE, the dispositive part of the original DECISION of this case, promulgated on November 19, 2001, is SET ASIDE and another one is entered AFFIRMING in part and REVERSING in part the judgment appealed from, as follows: 1. Declaring [Respondent] Romana de Vera the rightful owner and with better right to possess the property in question, being an innocent purchaser for value therefor; 2. Declaring Gloria Villafania [liable] to pay the following to [Respondent] Romana de Vera and to [Petitioner-]Spouses [Noel and Julie] Abrigo, to wit: As to [Respondent] Romana de Vera: P300,000.00 plus 6% per annum as actual damages; P50,000.00 as moral damages; P50,000.00 as exemplary damages; P30,000.00 as attorneys fees; and Cost of suit. As to [Petitioner-]Spouses [Noel and Julie] Abrigo: P50,000.00 as moral damages; P50,000.00 as exemplary damages; P30,000.00 as attorneys fees; Cost of suit. [4] The assailed Resolution denied reconsideration. The Facts Quoting the trial court, the CA narrated the facts as follows: As culled from the records, the following are the pertinent antecedents amply summarized by the trial court: On May 27, 1993, Gloria Villafania sold a house and lot located at Banaoang, Mangaldan, Pangasinan and covered by Tax Declaration No. 1406 to Rosenda Tigno-Salazar and Rosita Cave-Go. The said sale became a subject of a suit for annulment of documents between the vendor and the vendees. On December 7, 1993, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 40 of Dagupan City rendered judgment approving the Compromise Agreement submitted by the parties. In the said Decision, Gloria Villafania was given one year from the date of the Compromise Agreement to buy back the house and lot, and failure to do so would mean that the previous sale in favor of Rosenda Tigno-Salazar and Rosita Cave-Go shall remain valid and binding and the plaintiff shall voluntarily vacate the premises without need of any demand. Gloria Villafania failed to buy back the house and lot, so the [vendees] declared the lot in their name. Unknown, however to Rosenda Tigno-Salazar and Rosita Cave-Go, Gloria Villafania obtained a free patent over the parcel of land involved [on March 15, 1988 as evidenced by OCT No. P-30522]. The said free patent was later on cancelled by TCT No. 212598 on April 11, 1996. On October 16, 1997, Rosenda Tigno-Salazar and Rosita Cave-Go, sold the house and lot to the herein [Petitioner-Spouses Noel and Julie Abrigo]. On October 23, 1997, Gloria Villafania sold the same house and lot to Romana de Vera x x x. Romana de Vera registered the sale and as a consequence, TCT No. 22515 was issued in her name. On November 12, 1997, Romana de Vera filed an action for Forcible Entry and Damages against [Spouses Noel and Julie Abrigo] before the Municipal Trial Court of Mangaldan, Pangasinan docketed as Civil Case No. 1452. On February 25, 1998, the parties therein submitted a Motion for Dismissal in view of their agreement in the instant case that neither of the
G.R. NO. 156171 - SPOUSES RICARDO AND FERMA PORTIC, VS. ANASTACIA CRISTOBAL.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. NO. 156171 -
CaseG.R. No. 146815 - HEIRS OF PEDRO LAURORA AND LEONORA LAURORA, VS. STERLING TECHNOPARK III AND S.P. PROPERTIES, INC..
G.R. No. 146815 -
CaseG.R. No. 152438 - LOLITA R. AYSON, VS. MARINA ENRIQUEZ VDA. DE CARPIO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 152438 -