CARMELITA FUDOT, Petitioner,

G.R. No. 171008

vs. September 13, 2007

CATTLEYA LAND, INC., VELASCO, JR., JJ. Respondent.

Facts:

Sometime in July 1992, Cattleya Land, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as respondent) asked someone to
check, on its behalf, the titles of nine (9) lots, the subject land included, which it intended to buy from the
spouses Troadio and Asuncion Tecson. Finding no defect on the titles, respondent purchased the nine lots
through a Deed of Conditional Sale on 6 November 1992. Subsequently, on 30 August 1993, respondent
and the Tecsons executed a Deed of Absolute Sale over the same properties. The Deed of Conditional Sale
and the Deed of Absolute Sale were registered with the Register of Deeds on 06 November 1992 and 04
October 1993, respectively. The Register of Deeds refused to actually annotate the deed of sale on the
titles because of the existing notice of attachment pending before the Regional Trial Court of Bohol. The
attachment was eventually cancelled by virtue of a compromise agreement between the Tecsons and
their attaching creditor which was brokered by respondent. Titles to six (6) of the nine (9) lots were issued,
but the Register of Deeds refused to issue titles to the remaining three (3) lots , because the titles covering
the same were still unaccounted for.

Later, respondent learned that the Register of Deeds had already registered the deed of sale in favor of
petitioner and issued a new title herein.

The respondent filed its Complaintfor Quieting Of Title &/Or Recovery Of Ownership, Cancellation Of Title
With Damages before the Regional Trial Court of Tagbilaran City.

Issue:

Is the issuance of Deed of Sale valid?

Held:

On 31 October 2001, the trial court rendered its decision: (i) quieting the title or ownership of the subject
land in favor of respondent; (ii) declaring the deed of sale between petitioner and spouses Tecson invalid;
(iii) ordering the registration of the subject land in favor of respondent; (iv) dismissing respondents claim
for damages against the Register of Deeds for insufficiency of evidence; (v) dismissing Asuncions claim
for damages against petitioner for lack of factual basis; and (vi) dismissing petitioners counterclaim for
lack of the required preponderance of evidence.