"I chose to go to law school because I thought that someday, somehow I'd make a difference." -A.

May 19, 2015

Domingo vs. Reed

By With No comments:
  • Respondent Guillermo Reed was an overseas contract worker from 1978 to 1986. 
  • He purchased from the GSIS on installment basis a 166 sq. m. property located at MRR Road, Mangahan, Pasig. 
  • Because he was working abroad, it was his wife, Lolita Reed, who paid the consideration to the GSIS. 
  • On July 9, 1986, TCT No. 58195 covering said property was issued by the Registry of Deeds for the Province of Rizal, Metro Manila in the name of Lolita Reed, married to Guillermo Reed.
  • Guillermo Reed had allowed his brother, Dominador, and the latter’s wife, Luz, to stay in the house constructed on his property. 
  • In December, 1991, Dominador and Luz Reed were summoned to the barangay in connection with the complaint for ejectment filed against them by Eduardo Quiteves, who claimed to be the owner of the lot where their house stands.
  • Guillermo denied having sold his property.
  • In view of the claims of Eduardo Quiteves and Alberta Domingo that they bought the subject property, Guillermo Reed made a verification with the Register of Deeds of Pasig. 
  • Guillermo discovered that his title over the subject property had been cancelled.
  • On March 8, 1994, Guillermo Reed filed a complaint for reconveyance of property against alleging that his wife, Lolita Reed, from whom he had been estranged, conspiring with the other [petitioners], except the Register of Deeds of Pasig.
  • Guillermo alleged that the SPA was a forgery, that he did not sign the SPA nor appear before the notary public because he was working abroad and that spouses Villanera and Domingo and Eduardo Quiteves are purchasers in bad faith because they knew, at the time they transacted with Lolita Reed, that he was working abroad and estranged from the latter.
  • The alleged purchasers said that Guillermo reed gave a written consent for the sale of the properties.
  • RTC ruled in favor of petitioners. CA reversed the RTC ruling.
  • CA said that  CA held that the vendees were not purchasers for value in good faith. 
  • As for Eduardo Quiteves, he was faulted by the CA for not having inquired into and investigated the authenticity and validity of the SPA shown to him by Lolita, evidencing her husband’s alleged consent to the sale of their conjugal property. 
  • CA declared the Deeds of Sale executed by Lolita in favor of Spouses Danilo and Alberta Domingo and Eduardo Quiteves null and void. 
  • It also ordered the cancellation of the TCTS issued in their favor; and the reinstatement of TCT No. 58195 in the name of Lolita Reed, married to Guillermo Reed, insofar as it covered the portions of the property sold to petitioners.

Read More
The Law Chic Bar Exam FREE Downloads Notes Materials
Copyright © 2014 kite | All Rights Reserved. Design By Templateclue - Published By Gooyaabi Templates