Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

Scribd
Upload
55 views2 pages

(CD) 04. Saldera Vs Celedonio

The document discusses a land dispute between two parties who each claim to be the rightful owners based on competing deeds of sale. [1] Salera claims they purchased the property lawfully from the heirs of Brigido Tonacao in 1986, while the respondents claim they purchased it earlier from Catalino Tonacao, Brigido's father, though this sale was only verbal. [2] The RTC initially ruled in favor of Salera, but the Court of Appeals reversed this decision in favor of the respondents. [3] The Supreme Court then took up the case and ultimately ruled that the sale between Catalino and the respondents was invalid, as Catalino did not have the legal authority to sell the property, being that ownership had

Uploaded by

Nicole Cliano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
55 views2 pages

(CD) 04. Saldera Vs Celedonio

The document discusses a land dispute between two parties who each claim to be the rightful owners based on competing deeds of sale. [1] Salera claims they purchased the property lawfully from the heirs of Brigido Tonacao in 1986, while the respondents claim they purchased it earlier from Catalino Tonacao, Brigido's father, though this sale was only verbal. [2] The RTC initially ruled in favor of Salera, but the Court of Appeals reversed this decision in favor of the respondents. [3] The Supreme Court then took up the case and ultimately ruled that the sale between Catalino and the respondents was invalid, as Catalino did not have the legal authority to sell the property, being that ownership had

Uploaded by

Nicole Cliano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Salera alleged that they are the absolute owners of the property that they acquired from heirs

of Brigido
Tonacao as shown by deed of absolute sale executed in June 23, 1986. Spouses Salera filed in RTC for
quieting of title against the celedonio and policronia rodaje, respondents. When they asked the
provincial assessor to declare the property under their name, they found out that the tax declaration is
not under Brigido Tonacao but rather in the name of the respondents, Brigido.

The respondent claimed that they are the absolute owners because they purchase the property from
Catalino Tonacao , the father of Brigido. The sale was registered under their names and tax declaration
was issued to them. (There was only verbal contract of sale with Catalino).

1995, The RTC rendered their decision, in favour plaintiffs and against to defendants, declaring as the
legal owner and lawful owner. The sale between the respondent and Catalino are null and void because
of lack of capacity to sell.

The Court of Appeals, in a Decision dated October 9, 1998, reversed and set aside the trial court’s
Decision, declaring respondents the true and lawful owners.

Petitioners contend that the sale between Catalino andrespondents is void because the former was not
the ownerof the lot, hence “had no legal capacity to sue.” The trueowner was Brigido,Thus, his
spouse and children, being his successors-in-interest, could validly sell the property to
them(petitioners).

respondents insist that they arebuyers in good faith. They bought the property, had thedeed of sale
registered, and took possession thereof aheadof petitioners.
ISSUE:

Whether or not a double sales arise in this case.

RULING:

The Court of Appeals is wrong. Article 1544 of the Civil Code contemplates a case of double sale or
multiple sales by a single vendor.
it covers a situationwhere a single vendor sold one and the same immovableproperty to two or more
buyers.2 It cannot be invokedwhere the two different contracts of sale are made by twodifferent
persons, one of them not being the owner of the
property sold.3 In the instant case, the property was sold bytwo different vendors to different
purchasers. The first salewas between Catalino and herein respondents, while thesecond was between
Brigido’s heirs and herein petitioners
To begin with, defendants admit that Brigido Tonacao was thedeclared owner of the land in question before
defendantspurchased such land from Catalino Tonacao.

These admissions tend to establish ownership of the land inquestion by Brigido Tonacao. Upon his death,
therefore, theproperty

subject of the case at bar would by operation of law on succession,pass to the heirs of Brigido Tonacao,
namely: to the survivingspouse and his children.
Catalino Tonacao, the father of the deceased Brigido Tonacao,is excluded by operation of law by the presence
of the compulsoryheirs who are the children of Brigido Tonacao. Whatever saleCatalino Tonacao may have
executed in favor of the defendants isa sale by one who has no legal personality or authority to do so.Thus, the
sale by Catalino Tonacao to defendants is invalidatedby his lack of personality to execute such sale, which
conferred norights to the defendants nor did it impair the right of Brigido

Tonacao’s heirs to dispose of their inheritance in favor of theplaintiffs.”

You might also like