Felipe v Heirs of Maximo Aldon father's share in the lands.

The Felipes were also found to have purchased the properties in bad faith
- Maximo Aldon and his wife, GImena Almosara bought a parcel of land in because
1936 that of their actions to have Gimena Almosara sign a ready-made document
they later divided to 3. GImena sold these lots to spouses Eduardo and purporting
Hermogena to self the disputed lots to the appellees in December 1970, showing that
Felipe in 1951 without the consent of Maximo. they
- In 1976, the heirs of Maximo Aldon (Gimena and their 2 children) filed a knew that the lots still did not belong to them.
complaint Judgment is entered awarding to Sofia and Salvador Aldon their shares of
against the Felipes alleging that they were the owners of the said land, that the lands.
it was The petitioners, as possessors in bad faith, shall make an accounting of the
orally mortgaged to the Felipes and an offer to redeem the mortagage has fruits
been corresponding to the share aforementioned from 1959 and solidarity pay
refused. their
- The Felipes assert that they obtained the parcels of land thru purchase and value to Sofia and Salvador Aldon.
subsequent delivery.

W/N the “Deed of Purchase and Sale” executed by Gimena was void.

NO. It was voidable.

According to Art. 1390 of the Civil Code, among the voidable contracts are
"[T]hose
where one of the parties is incapable of giving consent to the contract."
Article 172
of the Civil Code provides that the wife cannot bind the conjugal
partnership
without the husband's consent except in cases provided by law. In the
instant case,
Gimena had no capacity to give consent to the contract of sale. The capacity
to give
consent belonged not even to the husband alone but to both spouses.
The voidable contract of Gimena was subject to annulment by her husband
only
during the marriage because he was the victim who had an interest in the
contract.
Gimena, who was the party responsible for the defect, could not ask for its
annulment. After the death of Maximo, his children acquired the right to
question
the defective contract insofar as it deprived them of their hereditary rights in
their