Sps Yu v Pacleb Facts: Respondent Baltazar Pacleb are registered owners of a parcel of land located in Barrio Langcaa, Dasmarinas,

Cavite covered by TCT. The subject property is covered by 3 documents; a deed of sale from B. Pacleb to Del Rosario, deed of absolute sale from Del Rosario to Javier and a contract to sell from Javier to Sps Yu. The sales were not registered. Yu filed a complaint for Specific performance & damages against Javier since the subject property was tenanted by Ramon Pacleb. They demanded the cancellation. Since Javier was declared on default due to not appearance the cancellation became final. After the cancellation petitioner and R. Pacleb executed an agreement in exchange for Ramons tenancy rights were pet paid 500k. Resp filed a complaint stating that the deed of sale was executed through fraud.TC favored pet sps as purchaser in GF. CA reversed. ISSUE: WON they are purchaser in GF WON the action is a proceeding in rem or personam Held: SC found the petition w/o merit I. They are not purchaser in GF. 1. The property remains to be registered in the name of the respondent despite the 2 deed of sale. They were not annotated 2. The 2 deeds of sale reveals that they were executed about 2 mons apart & that they contain identical provision 3. It is disputed that the property is in the possession of R. Pacleb, son of the registered owner, regardless of the representation given by the latter, this bare fat alone should have made petitioner suspicious. Rule: the law protects to a greater degree a purchaser who buys from the registered owner himself The action filed by the petitioner sps is an action in personam and the judgment before the court on specific performance against Javier is not valid. The settled rule is that the aim and object of an action determine its character. Whether a proceeding is in rem, or in personam, or quasi in rem for that matter, is determined by its nature and purpose, and by these only. A proceeding in personam is a proceeding to enforce personal rights and obligations brought against the person and is based on the jurisdiction of the person, although it may involve his right to, or the exercise of ownership of, specific property, or seek to compel him to control or dispose of it in accordance with the mandate

II.

of the court. The purpose of a proceeding in personam is to impose, through the judgment of a court, some responsibility or liability directly upon the person of the defendant. Of this character are suits to compel a defendant to specifically perform some act or actions to fasten a pecuniary liability on him. An action in personam is said to be one which has for its object a judgment against the person, as distinguished from a judgment against the propriety to determine its state. It has been held that an action in personam is a proceeding to enforce personal rights or obligations; such action is brought against the person. we ruled that an action for specific performance praying for the execution of a deed of sale in connection with an undertaking in a contract, such as the contract to sell, in this instance, is an action in personam. Being in personam it is only binding between the parties properly impleaded.