SPOUSES CLARO AND NIDA BAUTISTA V.

BERLINDA SILVA

502 SCRA 334 (19 September 2006)

75

Facts: A parcel land titled under the names of Spouses S

was sold by PS by executing a Deed of Absolute Sale in
favor of Spouses B. In the said Deed of Absolute Sale, PS
signed for himself and as attorney-in-fact of his wife, thru a
Special Power of Attorney. Thereafter, the wife filed a
Complaint for Annulment of the Deed of Absolute Sale,
Reconveyance, and Damages against Spouses B. Based on
the evidence presented, the RTC found that the wifes
signature in the Special Power of Attorney was a forgery and
that consequently, the Deed of Absolute Sale executed by
PS in favor of Spouses B is null and void for not being
authorized by the wife. RTC rendered judgment ordering the
reconveyance of the land. The Court of Appeals affirmed in
toto the judgment of the lower court, hence this appeal.

Issue/s: Whether or not the Spouses B may be considered

as purchasers in good faith having relied upon a Special
Power of Attorney which, on its face, appears legal, valid,
and genuine, and thus have a right to the property

Whether or not Spouses B may retain the portion of PSs

share in the property

Ruling:
1. The SPA being a forgery, it did not vest in PS any authority to
alienate the subject property without the consent of
respondent. Absent such marital consent, the deed of sale
was a nullity. In consequence thereof, Spouses B did not
acquire any right over the property.

2. No. The nullity of the sale of the conjugal property contracted

by the husband without the marital consent of the wife
affects the entire property, not just the share of the wife.