Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 14



OCCEA vs. LYDIA MORALES OBSIANA ESPONILLA June 4, 2 4 !.R. N". #$%&'( Se)"nd D*v*s*"n PUNO, J.: Facts: Spouses Nicolas and Irene Tordesillas owned a piece of land which their children Harod, Angela and Rosario, and grandchildren Arnold and Lilia de la Flor inherited. The heirs sold a part of the land to Al erta !orales. !orales possessed the lot as owner, constructed a house on it and appointed a careta"er to o#ersee her propert$. Arnold orrowed the %riginal &ertificate of Title '%&T( fro) Al erta co#ering the lot. Then, he e*ecuted an Affida#it ac"nowledging receipt of the %&T in trust and undertoo" to return said title free fro) changes, )odifications or cancellations. Howe#er, Arnold used the %&T he orrowed fro) the #endee Al erta !orales, su di#ided the entire lot into three su lots, and registered the) all under his na)e. Arnold did not return the %&T elonging to Al erta despite repeated re+uests. Arnold su se+uentl$ sold the land to spouses To)as and S$l#ina %cce,a. -hen the respondent heirs of Al erta learned of the sale, the$ filed a case for annul)ent of sale and cancellation of titles, with da)ages, against the %cce,a spouses, alleging ad faith since the %cce,as conducted ocular inspection of the area efore the purchase and their careta"er warned the) that Arnold is no longer the owner of the lot eing sold. %n the other hand, the %cce,a spouses alleged that the$ were u$ers in good faith as the titles to the su .ect lots were free fro) liens or encu) rances when the$ purchased the), that the$ #erified with the Anti+ue Registr$ of /eeds that Arnold0s T&Ts were clean and unencu) ered. Lower court declared the %cce,a spouses as u$ers in good faith and ruled that the action of the heirs was ti)e1 arred. &ourt of Appeals re#ersed the decision of the trial court. Hence the petition. Issue: -hether or not a purchaser of a registered land is o liged to )a"e in+uiries of an$ possi le defect or ad#erse clai) which does not appear on the &ertificate of Title Ruling: 2etition dis)issed. The petition at ar presents a case of dou le sale of an i))o#a le propert$. Article 3455 of the New &i#il &ode pro#ides that in case an i))o#a le propert$ is sold to different #endees, the ownership shall elong: '3( to the person ac+uiring it who in good faith first recorded it in the Registr$ of 2ropert$6 '2( shouldthere e no inscription, the ownership shall pertain to the person who in good faith was first in possession6 and, '7( in the a sence thereof, to the person who presents the oldest title,

pro#ided there is good faith. In all cases, good faith is essential. It is the asic pre)ise of the preferential rights granted to the one clai)ing ownership o#er an i))o#a le. -hat is )aterial is whether the second u$er first registers the second sale in good faith, i.e., without "nowledge of an$ defect in the title of the propert$ sold. The defense of indefeasi ilit$ of a Torrens title does not e*tend to a transferee who ta"es the certificate of title in ad faith, with notice of a flaw. Indeed, the general rule is that one who deals with propert$ registered under the Torrens s$ste) need not go e$ond the sa)e, ut onl$ has to rel$ on the title. He is charged with notice onl$ of such urdens and clai)s as are annotated on the title. Howe#er, this principle does not appl$ when the part$ has actual "nowledge of facts and circu)stances that would i)pel a reasona l$ cautious )an to )a"e such in+uir$ or when the purchaser has "nowledge of a defect or the lac" of title in his #endor or of sufficient facts to induce a reasona l$ prudent )an to in+uire into the status of the title of the propert$ in litigation. %ne who falls within the e*ception can neither e deno)inated an innocent purchaser for #alue nor a purchaser in good faith. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 7. 2$. P+*us ,e-."+e, .",*"+ /u+e 01*+s, *n ,*-e, s,+"n2e+ *n +*23,45 6*+s, ," +e2*s,e+ *n 2""d 1a*,3 The go#erning principle is prius te)pore, potior .ure 'first in ti)e, stronger in right(. 8nowledge $ the first u$er of the second sale cannot defeat the first u$er0s rights e*cept when the second u$er first registers in good faith the second sale '%li#ares #s. 9on:ales, 34; S&RA 77(. &on#ersel$, "nowledge gained $ the second u$er of the first sale defeats his rights e#en if he is first to register, since "nowledge taints his registration with ad faith 'see also Astorga #s. &ourt of Appeals, 9.R. No. 4<47=, 2> /ece) er 3;<5(. It was further held that it is essential, to )erit the protection of Article 3455, second paragraph, that the second realt$ u$er )ust act in good faith in registering his deed of sale '&ru: #. &a ana, 32; S&RA >4>, citing &ar onell #s. &ourt of Appeals, >; S&RA ;;, &risosto)o #s. &A, 9.R. No. ;4<57, =2 Septe) er 3;;2(. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 3=. Cruz vs. Cabaa 129 SCRA 656 June 1984 FACTS: In June 1965, respon en! "eo e#ar$a Cabaa so% !&e sub'e(! proper!) !o respon en! spouses Teo*$%o "e#asp$ an I%u+$na a Cabaa ,spouses "e#asp$- un er !&e$r (on!ra(! en!$!%e ./$%$&an#

0u%$n# 0ab$b$%$1 2&$(& s!$pu%a!e !&a! Cabaa (an repur(&ase !&e %an 2$!&$n one )ear *ro+ 3e(e+ber 41, 1966. T&e sa$ %an 2as no! repur(&ase , &o2ever, so !&e spouses "e#asp$ !oo5 possess$on o* !&e sa$ proper!). "a!er, Cabaa re6ues!e !&a! !&e %an !$!%e be %en! !o &er $n or er !o +or!#a#e !&e proper!) !o !&e 7&$%$pp$ne 8a!$ona% /an5 ,78/-, !o 2&$(& !&e spouses "e#asp$ )$e% e . 9n 9(!ober 21, 1968, Cabaa *or+a%%) so% !&e %an !o spouses "e#asp$ b) 2a) o* an abso%u!e sa%e. T&e spouses "e#asp$ !&en a!!e+p!e !o re#$s!er !&e ee o* sa%e, bu! *a$%e be(ause !&e) (ou% no! presen! !&e o2ner:s up%$(a!e o* !$!%e 2&$(& 2as s!$%% $n !&e possess$on o* !&e 78/ as +or!#a#e. Subse6uen!%), !&e) 2ere ab%e !o re#$s!er !&e o(u+en! o* sa%e on 0a) 14, 1969 un er 7r$+ar) ;n!r) 8o. 21<114 o* !&e Re#$s!er o* 3ee s o* =uezon 7rov$n(e. 9n 8ove+ber 29, 1968, Cabaa so% !&e sa+e proper!) !o &ere$n pe!$!$oner Abe%ar o Cruz ,no2 e(ease -, 2&o, $n !urn, !r$e !o re#$s!er !&e ee o* sa%e on Sep!e+ber 4, 19><. ?o2ever, &e 2as $n*or+e !&a! Cabaa &a a%rea ) so% !&e proper!) !o !&e spouses "e#asp$, so &e 2as on%) ab%e !o re#$s!er !&e %an $n &$s na+e on Februar) 9, 19>1. T&e CFI o* =uezon 7rov$n(e e(%are !&e spouses "e#asp$ as !&e !rue an r$#&!*u% o2ners o* !&e sub'e(! proper!) an !&e %an !$!%e !&a! Cruz &a a(6u$re as nu%% an vo$ . T&e Cour! o* Appea%s a**$r+e sa$ e($s$on, bu! or ere Cabaa re$+burse !o Cruz:s &e$rs !&e a+oun!s o* 72,452.5<, 2&$(& !&e %a!e pe!$!$oner Abe%ar o Cruz pa$ !o 78/ !o $s(&ar#e !&e +or!#a#e ob%$#a!$on o* Cabaa $n *avor o* sa$ ban5, an !&e a+oun! o* 74,49>.5<, represen!$n# !&e a+oun! pa$ b) sa$ Abe%ar o Cruz !o &er as (ons$ era!$on o* !&e sa%e 2$!& pa(!o e re!ro o* !&e sub'e(! proper!). ISS@;: A&o $s !&e r$#&!*u% o2ner o* !&e sub'e(! proper!)B C9@RT R@"I8C: T&e Supre+e Cour! a**$r+e !&e e($s$on o* !&e appe%%a!e (our! 2$!& +o $*$(a!$on or er$n# an sen!en($n# respon en! "eo e#ar$a Cabaa !o re$+burse an pa) !o pe!$!$oner:s &e$rs !&e !o!a% su+ o* 75,>5<.<<. T&ere $s no 6ues!$on !&a! spouses "e#asp$ 2ere !&e *$rs! bu)ers, *$rs! on June 1, 1965 un er a sa%e 2$!& r$#&! o* repur(&ase an %a!er on 9(!ober 21, 1968 un er a ee o* abso%u!e sa%e an !&a! !&e) &a !a5en possess$on o* !&e %an so% !o !&e+D !&a! Abe%ar o Cruz 2as !&e se(on bu)er un er a ee o* sa%e a!e 8ove+ber 29, 1968, 2&$(& !o a$% $n $(a!$ons, (on!rar) !o !&e !eE!, 2as a sa%e 2$!& r$#&! o* repur(&ase *or n$ne!) ,9<- a)s. T&ere $s no 6ues!$on, e$!&er, !&a! spouses "e#asp$ 2ere !&e *$rs! an !&e on%) ones !o be $n possess$on o* !&e sub'e(! proper!). T&e 5no2%e #e o* !&e *$rs! sa%e Abe%ar o Cruz &a #a$ne e*ea!s &$s r$#&!s even $* &e $s *$rs! !o re#$s!er !&e se(on sa%e, s$n(e su(& 5no2%e #e !a$n!s &$s pr$or re#$s!ra!$on 2$!& ba *a$!&. T&$s $s !&e pr$(e eEa(!e b) Ar!$(%e 1544 o* !&e C$v$% Co e. /e*ore !&e se(on bu)er (an ob!a$n pr$or$!) over !&e *$rs!, &e +us! s&o2 !&a! &e a(!e $n #oo *a$!& !&rou#&ou! ,$.e. $n $#noran(e o* !&e *$rs! sa%e an o* !&e *$rs! bu)er:s r$#&!s- F *ro+ !&e !$+e o* a(6u$s$!$on un!$% !&e !$!%e $s !rans*erre !o &$+ b) re#$s!ra!$on or *a$%$n# re#$s!ra!$on, b) e%$ver) o* possess$on. T&e se(on bu)er +us! s&o2 (on!$nu$n# #oo *a$!& an $nno(en(e or %a(5 o* 5no2%e #e o* !&e *$rs! sa%e un!$% &$s (on!ra(! r$pens $n!o *u%% o2ners&$p !&rou#& pr$or re#$s!ra!$on as prov$ e b) %a2. FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

CRU7 vs. CABANA #2& SCRA %$%, N". L8$%2(2, June 22, #&94

%n ?une 3, 3;>4, defendant Leodegaria &a ana sold a parcel of land with right of repurchase to defendants1spouses Teofilo Legaspi and Ilu)inada &a ana. A docu)ent @Ailihang !uling !a i ili@ stipulated that the land can e repurchased $ the #endor within one $ear fro) /ece) er 73, 3;>>. Said land was not repurchased and in the )eanti)e, howe#er, said defendants1spouses too" possession of the land. Bpon re+uest of Leodegaria &a ana, the title of the land was lent to her in order to )ortgage the propert$ to the 2hilippine National Aan". Said title was forthwith, deposited with the 2N<. %n %cto er 23, 3;><, defendant Leodegaria &a ana sold the land $ wa$ of a solute sale to the defendants1spouses. Howe#er, on No#e) er 2;, 3;><, defendant sold the sa)e propert$ to plaintiff A elardo &ru: and the latter was a le to register it in his na)e. -hile the title was registered in plaintiff1appellant &ru:Cs na)e on Fe ruar$ ;, 3;D3, he "new of the sale of the land to defendants spouses Legaspi, as he was inforned in the %ffice of the Register of /eed of Eue:on. ISSUE: -hether or not, the second u$er &ru:, eing the first to register the land creates right as against the first u$er, notwithstanding his "nowledge of the pre#ious sale. ;ELD: No. Said respondent spouses were li"e wise the first to register the sale with the right of repurchase in their fa#or on !a$ 37, 3;>4 under 2ri)ar$ Fntr$ No. 23=337 of the Register of /eeds. The$ could not register the a solute deed of sale in their fa#or and o tain the corresponding transfer certificate of title ecause at that ti)e the sellerCs duplicate certificate was still with the an". Aut there is no +uestion and the lower courts so found conclusi#el$ as a )atter of fact, that when petitioner &ru: succeeded in registering the later sale in his fa#or, he "new and he was infor)ed of the prior sale in fa#or of respondents spouses., Respondent appellate court correctl$ held that such "nowledge of a prior transfer of a registered propert$ $ a su se+uent purchaser )a"es hi) a purchaser in ad faith and his "nowledge of such transfer #itiates his title ac+uired, $ #irtue of the latter instru)ent of con#e$ance which creates no right as against the first purchaser. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
Consolidated Rural Bank va. CA 6a),s: The !adrid rothers were the registered owners of a lot. It was su di#ided. Ri:al !adrid sold part of his share to Ale.a 9a)iao and Felisa /a$ag $ #irtue of a /eed of Sale. The sale was not registered6 howe#er, 9a)iao and /a$ag declared the propert$ for ta*ation purposes. A part of the land was sold to Hernande: and dela &ru: and the heirs of the latter continued possession. The !adrid rothers sold the sa)e land to !ar+ue:. The sale was registered. !ar+ue: )ortgaged the land6 these were registered. The land was foreclosed and was sold to &ali*to. The heirs of dela &ru: filed a case for recon#e$ance. Issue: -%N 3455 would appl$. ;e<d: No, 3455 cannot e in#o"ed where two persons )ade the sale. Appl$ the principle of prior te)pore, potior .ure. The Heirs ha#e a superior right. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

ESPIRITU V. VALERIO (December 23, 1976)

FACTS: Valerio filed a case to quiet title against mother and daughter Espiritu who were asserting their adversary rights over said land and disturbing his possession thereof. Valerio presented a deed of sale from which he acquired the property while the Espiritus allege that they acquire the same from their deceased father.

The Espiritus also presented two deeds of sale to prove that their deceased father have a legal right over the property which they inherited. ISSUE: WON mother and daughter Espiritu have a better right over the property. HELD: Apparently this case concerns the sales of one parcel of land by the same vendor but in favor of two different vendees. !f both allegations of the parties are valid Espiritu"s contention that they have a better right than that the claimed by Valerio would seem to be meritorious in the light of the facts of the case and the provisions of Article #$%% of the New &ivil &ode it not being disputed that the 'eed of (ale in favor of them was registered first. )ut since the deeds of sale presented by Esiritu are found to be falsified they have no legal right to claim the disputed property.


Carbone%% vs. Cour! o* Appea%s, an 7on($o 69 SCRA 99 Januar) 19>6 FACTS: 9n Januar) 2>, 1955, respon en! Jose 7on($o eEe(u!e a pr$va!e +e+oran u+ o* sa%e o* &$s par(e% o* %an 2$!& $+prove+en!s s$!ua!e $n San Juan, R$za% $n *avor o* pe!$!$oner Rosar$o Carbone%% 2&o 5ne2 !&a! !&e sa$ proper!) 2as a! !&a! !$+e sub'e(! !o a +or!#a#e $n *avor o* !&e Repub%$( Sav$n#s /an5 ,RS/- *or !&e su+ o* 71,5<<.<<. Four a)s %a!er, 7on($o, $n ano!&er pr$va!e +e+oran u+, boun &$+se%* !o se%% !&e sa+e proper!) *or an $+prove pr$(e !o one ;++a In*an!e *or !&e su+ o* 72,45>.52, 2$!& !&e %a!!er s!$%% assu+$n# !&e eE$s!$n# +or!#a#e eb! $n *avor o* !&e RS/ $n !&e a+oun! o* 71,1>>.48. T&us, $n Februar) 2, 7on($o eEe(u!e a *or+a% re#$s!erab%e ee o* sa%e $n &er ,In*an!e:s- *avor. So, 2&en !&e *$rs! bu)er Carbone%% sa2 !&e se%%er 7on($o a *e2 a)s a*!er2ar s, br$n#$n# !&e *or+a% ee o* sa%e *or !&e %a!!er:s s$#na!ure an !&e ba%an(e o* !&e a#ree (as& pa)+en!, s&e 2as !o% !&a! &e (ou% no %on#er pro(ee 2$!& *or+a%$z$n# !&e (on!ra(! 2$!& &er ,Carbone%%- be(ause &e &a a%rea ) *or+a%$ze a sa%es (on!ra(! $n *avor o* In*an!e. To pro!e(! &er %e#a% r$#&!s as !&e *$rs! bu)er, Carbone%% re#$s!ere on Februar) 8, 1955 2$!& !&e Re#$s!er o* 3ee s &er a verse (%a$+ as *$rs! bu)er en!$!%e !o !&e proper!). 0ean2&$%e, In*an!e, !&e se(on bu)er, 2as ab%e !o re#$s!er !&e sa%e $n &er *avor on%) on Februar) 12, 1955, so !&a! !&e !rans*er (er!$*$(a!e o* !$!%e $ssue $n &er na+e (arr$e !&e u%) anno!a!e a verse (%a$+ o* Carbone%% as !&e *$rs! bu)er. T&e !r$a% (our! e(%are !&e (%a$+ o* !&e se(on bu)er In*an!e !o be super$or !o !&a! o* !&e *$rs! bu)er Carbone%%, a e($s$on 2&$(& !&e Cour! o* Appea%s reverse . @pon +o!$on *or re(ons$ era!$on, &o2ever, Cour! o* Appea%s annu%%e an se! as$ e $!s *$rs! e($s$on an a**$r+e !&e !r$a% (our!Gs e($s$on. ISS@;: A&o &as !&e super$or r$#&! over !&e sub'e(! proper!)B

C9@RT R@"I8C: T&e Supre+e Cour! reverse !&e appe%%a!e (our!Gs e($s$on an e(%are !&e *$rs! bu)er Carbone%% !o &ave !&e super$or r$#&! over !&e sub'e(! proper!), re%)$n# on Ar!$(%e 1544 o* !&e C$v$% Co e. @n%$5e !&e *$rs! an !&$r para#rap&s o* sa$ Ar!$(%e 1544, 2&$(& a((or pre*eren(e !o !&e one 2&o *$rs! !a5es possess$on $n #oo *a$!& o* persona% or rea% proper!), !&e se(on para#rap& $re(!s !&a! o2ners&$p o* $++ovab%e proper!) s&ou% be re(o#n$ze $n *avor o* one H2&o $n #oo *a$!& *$rs! re(or e H &$s r$#&!. @n er !&e *$rs! an !&$r para#rap&s, #oo *a$!& +us! (&ara(!er$ze !&e pr$or possess$on, 2&$%e un er !&e se(on para#rap&, #oo *a$!& +us! (&ara(!er$ze !&e a(! o* an!er$or re#$s!ra!$on. A&en Carbone%% bou#&! !&e %o! *ro+ 7on($o on Januar) 2>, 1955, s&e 2as !&e on%) bu)er !&ereo* an !&e !$!%e o* 7on($o 2as s!$%% $n &$s na+e so%e%) en(u+bere b) ban5 +or!#a#e u%) anno!a!e !&ereon. Carbone%% 2as no! a2are F an s&e (ou% no! &ave been a2are F o* an) sa%e !o In*an!e as !&ere 2as no su(& sa%e !o In*an!e !&en. ?en(e, Carbone%%:s pr$or pur(&ase o* !&e %an 2as +a e $n #oo *a$!& 2&$(& $ no! (ease a*!er 7on($o !o% &er on Januar) 41, 1955 o* &$s se(on sa%e o* !&e sa+e %o! !o In*an!e. Carbone%% 2an!e !o +ee! In*an!e bu! !&e %a!!er re*use so !o pro!e(! &er %e#a% r$#&!s, Carbone%% re#$s!ere &er a verse (%a$+ on Februar) 8, 1955. @n er !&e ($r(u+s!an(es, !&$s re(or $n# o* Carbone%%Gs a verse (%a$+ s&ou% be ee+e !o &ave been one $n #oo *a$!& an s&ou% e+p&as$ze In*an!e:s ba *a$!& 2&en !&e %a!!er re#$s!ere &er ee o* sa%e 4 a)s %a!er FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

*O(A*!O &A*)ONE++ petitioner vs.,ONO*A)+E &O-*T O. A//EA+( 0O(E /ON&!O E11A !N.ANTE and *A1ON !N.ANTE respondents.
2.*. No. +345564 0anuary 47 #567 .A&T(8 /etitioner &arbonell lives in an ad9oining lot owned by *espondent /oncio latter:s lot is mortgaged in favor of *epublic (avings )an; for /# $<<. /etitioner and another *espondent =!nfante> offered to buy the land owned by /oncio. Which /oncio in his failure to pay the mortgaged agreed for the petitioner to buy the land including his house for /5.$< per square meter on the condition that from the purchase price would come the money to be paid to the ban;. )oth parties settled the arrears of the mortgaged amounting /4%6.47. ,owever /etitioner only have /4<<.<< as per respondent:s information that he only owes the same to the ban;. *espondent then withdrew the deficit amount and was reimbursed by &arbonell the following day. The parties e?ecuted a document stipulating that /oncio may still occupy the land sold by him to the petitioner and if after a year he still can:t find a place to move that he shall pay rent in favor of the petitioner. (ubsequently /oncio had told &arbonell that the former can no longer pursue with the sale for he had given the land to !nfante to which he cannot withdraw even if he goes to 9ail. The said lot was fenced by !nfante.

Atty. 0ose 2arcia advised her to present an adverse claim over the land in question with the Office of the *egister of 'eeds of *i@al. /oncio admittedly sold the land to !nfante when she improved her offer. With the information that the land was not yet registered Atty. 2arcia in favor of the petitioner prepared an adverse claim over the property. Whereby upon registration of the same by !nfante the said adverse claim was noted in the Transfer &ertificate of Title. /etitioner filed a second complaint alleging that the sale between /oncio and !nfante be declared null and void. *espondent:s allegation was that /etitioner:s claim was unenforceable for lac; of written document. Trial &ourt ruled that the second sale was null and void. ,owever after re3trial Trial &ourt reversed it:s decision ruling that the claim of the respondents were greater than that of the petitioner. &A ruled in favor of petitioner alleging that it has a superior right over the respondent. After a motion for reconsideration &A reversed its decision. !((-E8 Whether or not /etitioner have the superior right over the property. ,E+'8 AE(. Article #$%% New &ivil &ode which is decisive of this case recites8 !f the same thing should have been sold to different vendees the ownership shall be transferred to the person who may have first taken possession thereof in good faith, if it should movable property. (hould it be immovable property, the ownership shall belong to the person acquiring it who in good faith first recorded it in the *egistry of /roperty. Should there be no inscription, the ownership shall pertain to the person who in good faith was first in the possession; and in the absence thereof to the person who presents the oldest title provided there is good faith =emphasis supplied>. When &arbonell bought the lot from /oncio on 0anuary 46 #5$$ she was the only buyer thereof and the title of /oncio was still in his name solely encumbered by ban; mortgage duly annotated thereon. &arbonell was not aware B and she could not have been aware B of any sale of !nfante as there was no such sale to !nfante then. ,ence &arbonell"s prior purchase of the land was made in good faith. ,er good faith subsisted and continued to e?ist when she recorded her adverse claim four =%> days prior to the registration of !nfantes"s deed of sale. &arbonell"s good faith did not cease after /oncio told her on 0anuary C# #5$$ of his second sale of the same lot to !nfante. )ecause of that information &arbonell wanted an audience with !nfante which desire underscores &arbonell"s good faith. With an aristocratic disdain unworthy of the good breeding of a good &hristian and good neighbor !nfante snubbed &arbonell li;e a leper and refused to see her. (o &arbonell did the ne?t best thing to protect her right B she registered her adversed claim on .ebruary D #5$$. -nder the circumstances this recording of her adverse claim should be deemed to have been done in good faith and should emphasi@e !nfante"s bad faith when she registered her deed of sale four =%> days later on .ebruary #4 #5$$. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111

ADALIN V. CA (Oct ber 1!, 1997)

FACTS: Appellee3Vendors sold their $3door commercial building to Appellants Au and +im located in front of !mperial ,otel in &otabato &ity. (ince there are lessees in the property the vendors offered it first to them twice but they refused both offers. As such appellee3vendors and appellants e?ecuted a deed of conditional sale. The contract states that they appellants will pay the down payment of C<<E first and the remaining balance after the appellee3vendors completely evicted the lessees occupying the property. After the vendors and the tenants made ;nown their intention to buy the property for a higher price. As such the vendors e?ecuted three deeds of sale of registered land in favor of the lessees. The vendors offered to return the downpayment paid by the appellants but the latter refused. The vendors contend that they can rescind the contract because the condition to evict the tenants was not completed. HELD: Although the contract was a conditional sale what was sub9ect to the condition is the payment of the balance. )oth parties have their respective obligations yet to be fulfilled the seller the eviction of the tenants and the buyer the payment of the balance of the purchase price. The choice of who to sell the property to however had already been made by the sellers and is thus no longer sub9ect to any condition nor open to any change. !n that sense the sale to the appellants was definitive and absolute. A clear breach of contract was made by the vendors. A case double sale occurred when the vendors sold the property to the tenants. When the tenants bought the property they are fully aware of its prior sale to the appellants. Though the second sale to the said tenants was registered such prior registration cannot erase the gross bad faith that characteri@ed such second sale and as such there is no legal basis to rule that such second sale prevails over the first sale of the said property.


Ada<*n vs. CA =!.R. N". #2 #&#. O),">e+ # , #&&'.? First Division, Hermosisima Jr. (J): 3 concurring, 1 took no part 6a),s: In August 198 , !"ena #. $a"anca, in %e&a"' o' t&e #a(o si%"ings, commissione( !ster )autista to "ook 'or %u*ers 'or t&eir propert* 'ronting t&e Imperia" Hote" in +ota%ato +it*. )autista "ogica""* o''ere( sai( propert* to t&e o,ners o' t&e Imperia" Hote" ,&ic& ma* %e e-pecte( to gra% t&e o''er an( take a(vantage o' t&e pro-imit* o' t&e propert* to t&e &ote" site. .rue enoug&, Faustino /u, t&e $resi(ent01enera" 2anager o' Imperia" Hote", agree( to %u* sai( propert*. .&us (uring t&at same mont& o' August 198 , a con'erence ,as &e"( in /u3s o''ice at t&e Imperia" Hote". $resent t&ere ,ere /u, 4oreto A(a"in ,&o ,as one o' t&e tenants o' t&e 50(oor, 10store* %ui"(ing stan(ing on t&e su%6ect propert*, an( !"ena $a"anca an( .eo'i"o #a(o in t&eir o,n %e&a"' as se""ers an( in %e&a"' o' t&e ot&er tenants o' sai( %ui"(ing. During t&e con'erence, /u an( 4im

categorica""* aske( $a"anca ,&et&er t&e ot&er tenants ,ere intereste( to %u* t&e propert*, %ut $a"anca a"so categorica""* ans,ere( t&at t&e ot&er tenants ,ere not intereste( to %u* t&e same. +onse7uent"*, t&e* agree( to meet at t&e &ouse o' $a"anca on 8 9eptem%er 198 to 'ina"i:e t&e sa"e. ;n sai( (ate, 4oreto A(a"in< /u an( 4im an( t&eir "ega" counse"< $a"anca an( #a(o an( t&eir "ega" counse"< an( one ot&er tenant, 2agno A(a"in, met at $a"anca3s &ouse. 2agno A(a"in ,as t&ere in &is o,n %e&a"' as tenant o' t,o o' t&e 'ive (oors o' t&e one0store* %ui"(ing stan(ing on t&e su%6ect propert* an( in %e&a"' o' t&e tenants o' t&e t,o ot&er (oors, name"*. +ar"os +a"ingasan an( Demetrio A(a*a. Again, /u an( 4im aske( $a"anca an( 2agno A(a"in ,&et&er t&e ot&er tenants ,ere intereste( to %u* t&e su%6ect propert*, an( 2agno A(a"in une7uivoca""* ans,ere( t&at &e an( t&e ot&er tenants ,ere not so intereste( main"* %ecause t&e* cou"( not a''or( it. Ho,ever, 2agno A(a"in asserte( t&at &e an( t&e ot&er tenants ,ere eac& entit"e( to a (istur%ance 'ee o'
Sa<es, 2 ( 0 ( 4 ;a@s,a)As 0Be+ne !ue++e+"4

$5=,===.== as consi(eration 'or t&eir vacating t&e su%6ect propert*. During sai( meeting, $a"anca an( #a(o, as se""ers, an( 4oreto A(a"in an( /u an( 4im, as %u*ers, agree( t&at t&e "atter ,i"" pa* $3==,=== as (o,npa*ment 'or t&e propert* an( t&at as soon as t&e 'ormer secures t&e eviction o' t&e tenants, t&e* ,i"" %e pai( t&e %a"ance o' $8,3==,===. $ursuant to t&e a%ove terms an( con(itions, a Dee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"e ,as (ra'te( %* t&e counse" o' /u an( 4im. ;n 8 9eptem%er 198 , at /u3s Imperia" Hote" o''ice, $a"anca an( !(uar(a >argas, representing t&e se""ers, an( 4oreto A(a"in an( /u an( 4im signe( t&e Dee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"e. .&e* a"so agree( to (e'er t&e registration o' t&e (ee( unti" a'ter t&e se""ers &ave secure( t&e eviction o' t&e tenants 'rom t&e su%6ect propert*. .&e tenants, &o,ever, re'use( to vacate t&e su%6ect propert*. )eing un(er o%"igation to secure t&e eviction o' t&e tenants, in accor(ance ,it& t&e terms an( con(itions o' t&e Dee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"e, !"ena $a"anca 'i"e( ,it& t&e )aranga* +aptain a "etter comp"aint 'or un"a,'u" (etainer against t&e sai( tenants. .,o (a*s a'ter $a"anca 'i"e( an e6ectment case %e'ore t&e )aranga* +aptain against t&e tenants o' t&e su%6ect propert*, 2agno A(a"in, Demetrio A(a*a an( +ar"os +a"ingasan ,rote "etters to $a"anca in'orming t&e #a(o si%"ings t&at t&e* &ave (eci(e( to purc&ase t&e (oors t&at t&e* ,ere "easing 'or t&e purc&ase price o' $?==,=== per (oor. A"most instant"*, $a"anca, in %e&a"' o' t&e #a(o si%"ings, accepte( t&e o''er o' t&e sai( tenants an( returne( t&e (o,npa*ments o' /u an( 4im. ;' course, t&e "atter re'use( to accept t&e reim%ursements. /u an( 4im 'i"e( a comp"aint ,it&t t&e )aranga* +aptain 'or )reac& o' +ontract against !"ena $a"anca. During t&e con'erence, /u an( 4im, i' on"* to accommo(ate 2agno A(a"in an( sett"e t&e case amica%"*,

agree( to %u* on"* 1 (oor eac& so t&at t&e "atter cou"( purc&ase t&e t,o (oors &e ,as occup*ing. Ho,ever, 2agno A(a"in a(amant"* re'use(, c"aiming t&at &e ,as a"rea(* t&e o,ner o' t&e 8 (oors. @&en 4im aske( 2agno A(a"in to s&o, t&e Dee( o' 9a"e 'or t&e t,o (oors, t&e "atter insouciant"* ,a"ke( out. .&ere %eing no sett"ement 'orge(, on 1? 2a* 1988, t&e )aranga* +aptain issue( t&e +erti'ication to Fi"e Action. ;n 5 2a* 1988, /u an( 4im 'i"e( t&eir comp"aint 'or A9peci'ic $er'ormance3 against t&e $a"anca, et. a". an( A(a"in in t&e B.+. ;n 1C June 1988, /u an( 4im cause( t&e annotation o' a DEotice o' 4is $en(ensF at t&e (orsa" portion o' .+. 189?3. ;n 85 ;cto%er 1988, +a"ingasan, A(a"in, et.a". 'i"e( a A2otion 'or Intervention as $"ainti''s0Intervenors3 appen(ing t&ereto a cop* o' t&e ADee( o' 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(3 signe( %* $a"anca, et.a". ;n 8 ;cto%er 1988, +a"ingasan et.a". 'i"e( t&e DDee( o' 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(F ,it& t&e Begister o' Dee(s on t&e %asis o' ,&ic& .+. 8C 91 over t&e propert* ,as issue( un(er t&eir names. ;n t&e same (a*, +a"ingasan, et.a". 'i"e( in t&e +ourt a 7uo a D2otion .o A(mit +omp"aint0In0InterventionF. Attac&e( to t&e +omp"aint0In0Intervention ,as t&e DDee( o' 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(.F /u an( 4im ,ere s&ocke( to "earn t&at $a"anca, et. a". &a( signe( t&e sai( (ee(. As a counter0move, /u an( 4im 'i"e( a motion 'or "eave to amen( +omp"aint an(, on 11Eovem%er1988, 'i"e( t&eir Amen(e( +omp"aint imp"ea(ing +a"ingasan, et. a". as a((itiona" De'en(ants. $a"anca, et.a". su''ere( a re%u'' ,&en, on 1= Januar* 1989, t&e B.+ 1enera" 9antos +it* issue( an ;r(er (ismissing t&e $etition o' +a"ingasan, et. a". 'or consignation. In t&e meantime, on 3= Eovem%er 1989, 4oreto A(a"in (ie( an( ,as su%stitute(, per or(er o' t&e +ourt a 7uo, on 5 Januar* 199=, %* &is &eirs, name"*, Anita, Ane"ita, 4oreto, Jr., .eresita, @i"'re(o, 4i"i%et&, Ee"son, He"en an( Joce", a"" surname( A(a"in. A'ter tria", t&e +ourt a 7uo ren(ere( 6u(gment in 'avor o' +a"ingasan, A(a"in, et.a". .&e +ourt or(er $a"anca, et.a". in so"i(um to pa* mora" (amages o' $5==,===.==, $1==,===.== e-emp"ar* (amages eac& to %ot& /u an( 4im an( $5=,===.== as an( 'or attorne*3s 'ees. .&e* ,ere or(ere( to return t&e $8==,===.== initia" pa*ment receive( %* t&em ,it& "ega" interest 'rom (ate o' receipt t&ereo' up to 3 Eovem%er 198 . /u an( 4im ,aste( no time in appea"ing 'rom t&e (ecision o' t&e tria" court. .&e* ,ere vin(icate( ,&en t&e +ourt o' Appea"s ren(ere( its (ecision in t&eir 'avor. Accor(ing"*, t&e +ourt o' Appea"s ren(ere( anot&er 6u(gment in t&e case an( or(ere( t&at t&e DDee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"eF ,as (ec"are( va"i(< t&at t&e DDee(s o' 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(F an( .+. 8C 91 ,ere &ere%* (ec"are( nu"" an( voi(< t&at +a"ingasan, et.a". e-cept t&e &eirs o' 4oreto A(a"in ,ere or(ere( to vacate t&e propert* ,it&in 3= (a*s 'rom t&e 'ina"it* o' t&e Decision< t&at $a"anca, et.a" ,ere or(ere( to e-ecute, in 'avor o' /u an( 4im, a DDee( o' A%so"ute 9a"eF
Sa<es, 2 ( 0 4 4 ;a@s,a)As 0Be+ne !ue++e+"4

covering C (oors o' t&e propert* (,&ic& inc"u(es t&e area o' t&e propert* on ,&ic& sai( 'our (oors ,ere

constructe() e-cept t&e (oor purc&ase( %* 4oreto A(a"in, 'ree o' an* "iens or encum%rances< t&at /u am( 4im ,ere or(ere( to remit to $a"anca, et.a". t&e %a"ance o' t&e purc&ase price o' t&e C (oors in t&e amount o' $1,88=,===< t&at $a"anca, et.a". ,ere or(ere( to re'un( to +a"ingasan, et.a". t&e amount o' $8C=,=== ,&ic& t&e* pai( 'or t&e propert* un(er t&e DDee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(F ,it&out interest consi(ering t&at t&e* a"so acte( in %a( 'ait&< t&at 2agno A(a"in ,as or(ere( to pa* t&e amount o' $3,=== a mont&, an( eac& o' ot&er tenants, e-cept 4oreto A(a"in, t&e amount o' $1,5== to /u an( 4im, 'rom Eovem%er 198 , up to t&e time t&e propert* ,as vacate( an( (e"ivere( to t&e "atter, as reasona%"e compensation 'or t&e occupanc* o' t&e propert*, ,it& interest t&ereon at t&e rate o' ?G per annum< an( t&at $a"anca, et.a". ,ere or(ere( to pa*, 6oint"* an( severa""*, to /u an( 4im, in(ivi(ua""*, t&e amount o' $1==,===.== %* ,a* o' mora" (amages, $8=,===.== %* ,a* o' e-emp"ar* (amages an( $8=,===.== %* ,a* o' attorne*3s 'ees. Hence, t&e petition 'or revie,. .&e 9upreme +ourt (ismisse( t&e petition< ,it& costs against +a"ingasan, A(a"in, et.a". #. !+"unds -e+e<@ s.<*,s as.e),s "1 ,3e *ssue, *.e. ,3e ,+ue na,u+e "1 ,+ansa),*"n en,e+ed >@ Yu and L*- B*,3 ,3e Cad" s*><*n2s .&e groun(s re"ie( upon %* +a"ingasan, A(a"in, et.a". are essentia""* a sp"itting o' t&e various aspects o' t&e one pivota" issue t&at &o"(s t&e ke* to t&e reso"ution o' t&is controvers*: t&e true nature o' t&e sa"e transaction entere( into %* t&e #a(o si%"ings ,it& Faustino /u an( Antonio 4im. .&e +ourts task amounts to a (ec"aration o' ,&at kin( o' contract &a( %een entere( into %* sai( parties an( o' ,&at t&eir respective rig&ts an( o%"igations are t&ereun(er. 2. Deed "1 C"nd*,*"na< Sa<e5 O><*2a,*"n "1 ,3e se<<e+ ," e/e), ,3e ,enan,s and ,3e "><*2a,*"n "1 ,3e >u@e+ ," .a@ ,3e >a<an)e "1 ,3e .u+)3ase .+*)e5 C3"*)e as ," B3"- ," se<< *s de,e+-*ned $a"anca, in %e&a"' o' t&e #a(o si%"ings ,&o &a( a"rea(* committe( to se"" t&e propert* to /u an( 4im an( 4oreto A(a"in, un(erstoo( &er o%"igation to e6ect t&e tenants on t&e su%6ect propert*. Having gone to t&e e-tent o' 'i"ing an e6ectment case %e'ore t&e )aranga* +aptain, $a"anca c"ear"* s&o,e( an inte""igent appreciation o' t&e nature o' t&e transaction t&at s&e &a( entere( into: t&at s&e, in %e&a"' o' t&e #a(o si%"ings, &a( a"rea(* so"( t&e su%6ect propert* to /u an( 4im an( 4oreto A(a"in, an( t&at on"* t&e pa*ment o' t&e %a"ance o' t&e purc&ase price ,as su%6ect to t&e con(ition t&at s&e ,ou"( success'u""* secure t&e eviction o' t&eir tenants. In t&e sense t&at t&e pa*ment o' t&e %a"ance o' t&e purc&ase price ,as su%6ect to a con(ition, t&e sa"e transaction ,as not *et comp"ete(, an( %ot& se""ers an( %u*ers &ave t&eir respective o%"igations *et to %e 'u"'i""e(: t&e 'ormer, t&e e6ectment o' t&eir tenants< an( t&e "atter, t&e pa*ment o' t&e %a"ance o' t&e purc&ase price. In t&is sense, t&e Dee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"e ma* %e an accurate (enomination o' t&e transaction. )ut t&e

sa"e ,as con(itiona" on"* inasmuc& as t&ere remaine( *et to %e 'u"'i""e(, t&e o%"igation o' t&e se""ers to e6ect t&eir tenants an( t&e o%"igation o' t&e %u*ers to pa* t&e %a"ance o' t&e purc&ase price. .&e c&oice o' ,&o to se"" t&e propert* to, &o,ever, &a( a"rea(* %een ma(e %* t&e se""ers an( is t&us no "onger su%6ect to an* con(ition nor open to an* c&ange. In t&at sense, t&ere'ore, t&e sa"e ma(e %* $a"anca to /u, 4im, an( A(a"in ,as (e'initive an( a%so"ute. (. N" a),s "1 .a+,*es /us,*1*es +ad*)a< )3an2e "1 Pa<an)aDs ."s,u+e5 N" <e2a< >as*s 1"+ ,3e a))e.,an)e "1 ,enan,Ds "11e+ ," >u@ Eot&ing in t&e acts o' t&e se""ers an( %u*ers %e'ore, (uring or a'ter t&e sai( transaction 6usti'ies t&e ra(ica" c&ange o' posture o' $a"anca ,&o, in or(er to provi(e a "ega" %asis 'or &er "ater acceptance o' t&e tenants3 o''er to %u* t&e same propert*, in e''ect c"aime( t&at t&e sa"e, %eing con(itiona", ,as (epen(ent on t&e se""ers not c&anging t&eir min(s a%out se""ing t&e propert* to /u an( 4im. .&e tenants, 'or t&eir part, (e'en(e( $a"anca3s su%se7uent (ea"ing ,it& t&em %* asserting t&eir option rig&ts un(er $a"anca3s "etter o' 8 9eptem%er 198 an( &arking on t&e non0'u"'i""ment o' t&e con(ition t&at t&eir e6ectment %e secure( 'irst. 4. N" <e2a< +a,*"na<*E*n2 )an san),*"n Pa<an)aDs a+>*,+a+@ >+ea)3 "1 )"n,+a),
Sa<es, 2 ( 0 $ 4 ;a@s,a)As 0Be+ne !ue++e+"4

.&e +ourt cannot countenance t&e (ou%"e (ea"ing perpetrate( %* $a"anca in %e&a"' o' t&e #a(o si%"ings. Eo amount o' "ega" rationa"i:ing can sanction t&e ar%itrar* %reac& o' contract t&at $a"anca committe( in accepting t&e o''er o' 2agno A(a"in, A(a*a an( +a"ingasan to purc&ase a propert* a"rea(* ear"ier so"( to /u an( 4im. $. A<<e2ed ( 8da@ ".,*"n 1"+ ,enan, ," .u+)3ase v"*d 1"+ <a)A "1 )"ns*de+a,*"n .&e 3=0(a* option to purc&ase t&e su%6ect propert* a""ege("* given to t&e tenants as containe( in t&e 8 9eptem%er 198 "etter o' $a"anca, is not va"i( 'or utter "ack o' consi(eration. %. Pa<an)a and ,enan,s es,"..ed /u an( 4im t,ice aske( $a"anca an( t&e tenants concerne( as to ,&et&er or not t&e "atter ,ere intereste( to %u* t&e su%6ect propert*, an( t,ice, too, t&e ans,er given ,as t&at t&e sai( tenants ,ere not intereste( to %u* t&e su%6ect propert* %ecause t&e* cou"( not a''or( it. +"ear"*, sai( tenants an( $a"anca, ,&o represente( t&e 'ormer in t&e initia" negotiations ,it& /u an( 4im, are estoppe( 'rom (en*ing t&eir ear"ier statement to t&e e''ect t&at t&e sai( tenants 2agno A(a"in, A(a*a an( +a"ingasan &a( no intention o' %u*ing t&e 'our (oors t&at t&e* ,ere "easing 'rom t&e #a(o si%"ings. '. Su>seFuen, sa<e )<ea+<@ -ade *n >ad 1a*,3 .&e su%se7uent sa"e o' t&e su%6ect propert* %* $a"anca to t&e tenants, smacks o' gross %a( 'ait&, consi(ering t&at $a"anca an( t&e sai( tenants ,ere in 'u"" a,areness o' t&e August an( 9eptem%er negotiations %et,een )autista an( $a"anca, on t&e one &an(, an( 4oreto A(a"in, Faustino /u an( Antonio 4im, on t&e

ot&er, 'or t&e sa"e o' t&e one0store* %ui"(ing. It cannot %e (enie(, t&us, t&at $a"anca an( t&e sai( tenants entere( into t&e su%se7uent or secon( sa"e not,it&stan(ing t&eir 'u"" kno,"e(ge o' t&e su%sistence o' t&e ear"ier sa"e over t&e same propert* to /u an( 4im. 9. P+*"+ +e2*s,+a,*"n )ann", e+ase 2+"ss >ad 1a*,3 )3a+a),e+*E*n2 se)"nd sa<e .&oug& t&e secon( sa"e to t&e sai( tenants ,as registere(, suc& prior registration cannot erase t&e gross %a( 'ait& t&at c&aracteri:e( suc& secon( sa"e, an( conse7uent"*, t&ere is no "ega" %asis to ru"e t&at suc& secon( sa"e prevai"s over t&e 'irst sa"e o' t&e sai( propert* to /u an( 4im. &. Re1usa< "1 ,enan,s 1+"- va)a,*n2 .+".e+,@ n", a va<*d /us,*1*)a,*"n ," +ene2e "n "><*2a,*"n ," se<< $a"anca, et.a". cannot invoke t&e re'usa" o' t&e tenants to vacate t&e propert* an( t&e "atter3s (ecision to t&emse"ves purc&ase t&e propert* as a va"i( 6usti'ication to renege on an( turn t&eir %acks against t&eir o%"igation to (e"iver or cause t&e eviction o' t&e tenants 'rom an( (e"iver p&*sica" possession o t&e propert* to /u an( 4im. It ,ou"( %e t&e :enit& o' ine7uit* 'or $a"anca, et. a". to invoke t&e occupation %* t&e tenants, as o' t&e propert*, as a 6usti'ication to ignore t&eir o%"igation to &ave t&e tenants evicte( 'rom t&e propert* an( 'or t&em to give $5=,===.== (istur%ance 'ee 'or eac& o' t&e tenants an( a 6usti'ication 'or t&e "atter to &o"( on to t&e possession o' t&e propert*. # . Se)"nd sa<e )ann", >e .+e1e++ed even *1 ,3e .+*"+ )"nd*,*"na< sa<e Bas n", )"nsu--a,ed Assuming, gratia arguen(i, 'or t&e nonce, t&at t&ere &a( %een no consummation o' t&e DDee( o' +on(itiona" 9a"eF %* reason o' t&e non0(e"iver* to /u an( 4im o' t&e propert*, it (oes not t&ere%* mean t&at t&e DDee( o' 9a"e o' Begistere( 4an(F e-ecute( %* $a"anca, et.a" an( t&e tenants s&ou"( %e given pre'erence. 00000000000000000000000000000000000000
&ru:ado #. Austos &ase: An appeal fro) the .udg)ent of &FI 2a)panga allowing declaring defendant Austos as the rightful owner of the propert$ in +uestion. Austos and Fscaler who has said to e detaining such land, refused to deli#er the possession thereof to plaintiff and refused to recogni:e his ownership of the sa)e. Facts: Agapito &ru:ado was a poor )an li#ing in 2a)panga, he had a .o in court ut was still not enough to support his fa)il$. He aspired to hold the office of procurador in the &FI of 2a)panga ut he was una le to gi#e the re+uired ond, an indispensa le condition for his appoint)ent. Since &ru:ado was friends with Austos, a rich wo)an in their place. He egged the latter to si)ulate a )ortgage deed of a certain propert$ and ha#e it e*ecuted in court in his fa#or onl$ to pose that he has real propert$ to ena le hi) to +ualif$ to such position of procurador. In truth, the said )ortagage was a front and fraudulent ut was effected $ )a"ing a pretended contract which ore the appearance of truth. It is un+uestiona le that the contract of sale was perfect and inding upon oth contracting parties since their na)es oth appear in that instru)ent to ha#e agreed upon the thing sold. Aut it is also undenia le that the said contract was not consu))ated. 3.( &ru:ado did not pa$ the purchase price of 22,2== 2.( he ne#er too" possession of the land apparentl$ sold in the said deed. All that the #endee did was to pledge the land as a securit$ for the faithful discharge of the duties of his office.

Santiago &ru:ado, the son, rought an action for reco#er$ of possession, founded on the right trans)itted to hi) $ his father at his death G a right arising fro) the said si)ulated deed of sale of the land in +uestion. Issue: -HN the said deed of sale was si)ulated, not with the intent to defraud 7rd persons, ut for the sole purpose of )a"ing it appear that Agapito &ru:ado has real propert$I -HN rights of trans)ission ac+uired $ Santiago &ru:ado fro) the death of his father, pertaining to the said land in contest is #alid and without defectI Ruling: Bnder the law, the contract of purchase and sale, as consensual, is perfected $ consent as to the price and the thing and is consu))ated $ the reciprocal deli#er$ of the one and the other. Full ownership of the thing sold eing con#e$ed to the #endee, fro) which )o)ent the right of action deri#ed fro) this right )a$ e e*ercised. G the record discloses that there was no pa$)ent )ade $ &ru:ado to Austos, thus, rendering the contract not to e consu))ated. Art 33>5 states that, a creditor has a right to the fruits of the ti)e the o ligation to deli#er it arise. Howe#er, he shall not ac+uire a propert$ right thereto until it has een deli#ered to hi). Aesides the failure to pa$ the purchase price, neither the #endee nor his heirs, had at an$ ti)e ta"en possession of the land. Se#en witnesses attest to the fact, Austos and her hus and while still li#ing, continued to possess the said land supposedl$ sold to Agapito &ru:ado and culti#ated it, as she had done long efore the sale of Septe) er 3<D4 to Septe) er 3<;3, the date of co)plaint $ Santiago &ru:ado. &onse+uentl$, at the death of Agapito, he could not ha#e trans)itted to the Santiago as his successor an$ greater right than a personal right to e*act fulfill)ent of a contract, as plaintiff was not the owner of the said land, he could not #alidl$ register it. This fulfill)ent of a right has alread$ prescri ed since, under the law, prescription towards real propert$ shall e 7= $ears. In the case at ar, the action to reco#er too" 75 $ears to ring it to court, thus has alread$ prescri ed. 2etition is denied.