Javier v.

Vda de Cruz

GR L 25891| November 29 1977

Petitioner: Benedicto Javier

Respondent: Dominga vda. De Cruz; Leonila, Roman, Eliseo, Liberata, Melecio (all surnamed Cruz)
(Article 1409 of the Civil Code, Contracts)

DOCTRINE

FACTS
1. Benedicto Javier, as administrator of the Estate of Eusebio Cruz, instituted against Dominga
Vda. de Cruz and her children to declare null and void a deed of sale of a part of a parcel of
land located in Barrio San Isidro, Taytay, Rizal.
2. He alleges that the deceased, Eusebio Cruz did not leave any will or compulsory heirs, was
the absolute and exclusive owner of a parcel of land located in Taytay, Rizal. It was said that
he inherited this from his forebears.
3. During his lifetime, Eusebio has been living with one Teodora Santos without the sanction of
marriage who had with her as distant relatives and protégées Gregorio and Justo Cruz.
Gregorio was the father of Delfin, the deceased husband of defendant Dominga and the
father of the other defendant.
4. Javier alleges that:
a. Delfin by means of deceit and in collusion with persons among them his father
Gregorio made Eusebio Cruz, who could read and write, stamp his thumbmark on a
deed of sale of a portion of the land consisting 26,577 sqm for P700 in favor of
Delfin Cruz.
b. Delfin did not have the amount, Eusebio has never received such, that Eusebio was
almost dying and in fact died 17 days after the alleged sale.
c. Defendant Dominga together with her children co-defendants presented an
application in their names for the registration and confirmation of title of the
totality of the said land with an area of 182,959 sqm instead of only the portion of
26,577 square meters supposedly sold by the late Eusebio Cruz to Delfin Cruz.
d. The application was done taking advantage of the fraudulent deed of sale.
5. Defendants allege that
a. Eusebio and Isidora were legally married and that the property was bought by the
spouses during their marriage.
b. Dominga has obtained through absolute sale of the land, Eusebio having disposed it
to them, and as such, Javier now has no personality to sue.
c. Deed was thumbmarked by the Cruz and Santos and acknowledged before the
notary public, then registered.
d. Defendants have occupied publicly, openly, continuously, peacefully, and adversely
against the whole world for more than 18 years.
6. CFI declared the sale valid because of the doctrine of presumption of regularity of official
acts and private transactions.
ISSUE
W/N the affidavit of transfer of real property are void and inexistent for fraud and lack of consent of
and consideration to Eusebio Cruz – YES.

PROVISIONS
Art 1409.

RULING & RATIO

Yes. There was no consent and consideration. The facts and considerations during that time are
indicative of such lack.
 When the deed of sale was executed, Eusebio Cruz was almost 100 years old and was in a
weak condition.
 Son of the notary public Valle, testified that Eusebio Cruz was already very old and could not
answer the question whether the signature on the deed of sale, was his signature. Eusebio
could not talk, was very ill and was about to die when his thumbmark was affixed on the
deed of sale.
 Delfin did not have any means of livelihood. He was only the houseboy of Eusebio.
 Delfin could not have raised the amount of P700.00 as consideration of the land supposedly
sold to him by Eusebio.
 Although the deed of sale purports to convey a parcel of land of only 26,577 sqm, the
defendants as heirs of Delfin claim a much bigger land area of 182,959 sqm assessed at
P4,310.
 Court said that the consideration of P700.00 is not only grossly inadequate but is shocking
to the conscience. No sane person would sell the land claimed by the defendants for only
about P40.00 per hectare.

DISPOSITION
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby reversed and the deed of sale, Exhibit A, is
declared null and void and the estate of Eusebio Cruz is declared the owner of the land described in
the amended complaint. The defendants are ordered to desist from in any manner disturbing the
possession of the administrator of the estate of Eusebio Cruz of the land in question. No
pronouncement as to costs