6. Vitangcol vs New Vista Properties

8/17/2019 6. Vitangcol vs New Vista Properties

1/26

ALICE VITANGCOL and

NORBERTO VITANGCOL,

Petitioners,

- versus -

NEW VISTA PROPERTIES, INC.,

MARIA ALIPIT, REGISTER OF

DEEDS OF CALAMBA,

LAGUNA, and the HONORABLE

COURT OF APPEALS,

Respondents.

G.R. No. 1!"1#

Present:

YNARES-SANTIAGO, Chairperson,

CHICO-NAARIO,

!E"ASCO, #R.,

NACH$RA, and

PERA"TA, JJ .

Pro%u&'ated:

Septe%(er )*, +

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

D E C I S I O N


2/26

VELASCO, $R., J .%

The Ca&e

In this Petition /or Revie0 under Ru&e 12 o/ the Ru&es o/ Court, petitioners

A&i3e !itan'3o& and Nor(erto !itan'3o& 43o&&e3tive&5, !itan'3o&6 assai& the Au'ust

)1, +7 8e3ision)9) and 8e3e%(er ), +7 Reso&ution+9+ o/ the Court o/

Appea&s 4CA6 in CA-G.R. C! No. ;1+2 0hi3h reversed the 8e3e%(er +), +1

Order


3/26

On #une );, );, @aria and C&e%ente A. A&ipit, 0ith the %arita& 3onsent o/

the &atters 0i/e, ee3uted a Spe3ia& Po0er o/ Attorne5191 4SPA6 3onstitutin'

@i&a'ros A. 8e Gu%an as their attorne5-in-/a3t to se&& their propert5 des3ri(ed in

the SPA as &o3ated at =o. "atian, Ca&a%(a, "a'una 3overed (5 TCT No. 4+2$ARE @ETERS 0as redu3ed to 9+1+,21 S>$ARE @ETERS,

0hi3h is the su(?e3t o/ the sa&e.797

o&&o0in' the sa&e, Ne0 !ista i%%ediate&5 entered the su(?e3t &ot, /en3ed it

0ith 3e%ent posts and (ar(ed 0ires, and posted a se3urit5 'uard to deter

trespassers.

/[/] (d. at 60-61.

5[5] (d. at 62-6/.

6[6] (d. at 62.


4/26

De interpose at this point the o(servation that the propert5 de&ivered to and

o33upied (5 Ne0 !ista 0as deno%inated in the SPA as Lot No. 1() 3overed (5

TCT No. *+)(11 +)(-, 0hi&e in the deed o/ a(so&ute sa&e in /avor o/ Ne0 !ista

the o(?e3t o/ the pur3hase is des3ri(ed as Lot No. 1"+ 3overed (5 TCT No.

*+)(11 +)+-.

The 3ontrovers5 arose %ore than a de3ade &ater 0hen respondent Ne0 !ista

&earned that the par3e& o/ &and it paid /or and o33upied, i.e., "ot No. )*+, 0as

(ein' 3&ai%ed (5 petitioners !itan'3o& on the stren'th o/ a 8eed o/ A(so&ute Sa&e

/or "ot No. )*+ under TCT No. 4+2


5/26

to the on-'oin' pro3ess o/ re3&assi/i3ation o/ the su(?e3t &ot /ro% a'ri3u&tura& to

3o%%er3ia&Findustria&. Ne0 !ista pra5ed, a%on' others, /or the 3an3e&&ation o/

!itan'3o&s TCT No. T-1;+*


6/26

and @aria A&ipit had rati/ied and va&idated the sa&e o/ "ot No. )*+ 3overed (5

TCT No. 4+2


7/26

The De'e45e3 +1, +""# RTC O3de3

ro% the a(ove order, !itan'3o& sou'ht re3onsideration,))9)) atta3hin' to

the %otion a 3op5 o/ the #une );, ); SPA 0hi3h, in the hearin' on #une *, +1,

112.2./. 4n 09 August 19)9, p!ainti= paid %!eente . A!ipit and deendant&aria . A!ipit t#e ba!ance o t#e purc#ase price o t#e $ubect Property in t#eaount o $i: &i!!ion ;i"e 3undred Tenty T#ree T#ousand ig#t 3undred Pesos76,52*,)00.008. Cpon payent o t#e ba!ance, %!eente . A!ipit and deendant&aria . A!ipit, acting t#roug# t#eir du!y aut#ori'ed agent and attorney-in-act&i!agros . A!ipit, e:ecuted a eed o Abso!ute $a!e dated 09 August 19)9 o"er t#e$ubect Property and ga"e t#e origina! oners dup!icate o Transer %erti


8/26

0as a33epted as eviden3e pursuant to Se3. ;, Ru&e ) o/ the Ru&es o/ Court.)+9)+

=5 Order dated #u&5 )1, +1, the RTC 'ranted re3onsideration and dis%issed the

a%ended 3o%p&aint, disposin' as /o&&o0s:

In vie0 o/ the /ore'oin', the 3ourt here(5 set aside its Order dated

Nove%(er +2, +< and (5 virtue o/ this order, here(5 /inds that the A%ended

Co%p&aint states no 3ause o/ a3tion and that the 3&ai% o/ the p&ainti// in the present a3tion is unen/or3ea(&e under the provisions o/ the statue 9si3 o/ /rauds,

hen3e, the A%ended Co%p&aint is here(5 ordered 8IS@ISSE8, pursuant to Ru&e

)7, Se3tion ), para'raph ' and i.

SO OR8ERE8.

)<

9)


9/26

The RTC a&so stated the o(servation that Ne0 !istas a3t o/ not dire3t&5

%entionin' the SPA and the non-atta3h%ent o/ a 3op5 thereo/ in the a%ended

3o%p&aint 3onstituted an atte%pt to hide the /a3t that @i&a'ros A&ipit-de Gu%an is

on&5 authoried to se&& a par3e& o/ &and deno%inated as "ot No. )*


10/26

DHEREORE, pre%ises 3onsidered, the +) 8e3e%(er +1 Order o/ the3ourt a #"o is here(5 RE!ERSE8 and SET ASI8E, and the A%ended Co%p&aint

is here(5 REINSTATE8. The de/endants-appe&&ees are here(5 dire3ted to /i&e

their respe3tive ans0ersFresponsive p&eadin's 0ithin the ti%e pres3ri(ed under theRu&es o/ Court.

SO OR8ERE8.)79)7

The CA /au&ted the RTC /or dis%issin' the a%ended 3o%p&aint, o(servin'

that it 0as a(surd /or the RTC to reBuire a 3op5 o/ the SPA 0hi3h 0as not even

%entioned in the a%ended 3o%p&aint. Pushin' this o(servation /urther, the CA he&d

that the a%ended 3o%p&aint, /i&ed as it 0ere (e/ore responsive p&eadin's 3ou&d (e

/i&ed (5 the de/endants (e&o0, superseded the ori'ina& 3o%p&aint. As thus

superseded, the ori'ina& 3o%p&aint and a&& do3u%ents appended thereto, su3h as the

SPA, %a5 no &on'er (e taen 3o'nian3e o/ in deter%inin' 0hether the a%ended

3o%p&aint su//i3ient&5 states a 3ause o/ a3tion. It, thus, 3on3&uded that the RTC

erred in &ooin' (e5ond the /our 3orners o/ the a%ended 3o%p&aint in reso&vin' the

%otion to dis%iss on the 'round o/ its /ai&in' to state a 3ause o/ a3tion.

And 3itin' ?urispruden3e,)*9)* the CA ru&ed that even i/ the SPA 0ere

3onsidered, sti&& the dis3repan35 thereo/ re&ative to the deed o/ a(so&ute sa&ein

ter%s o/ &ot and tit&e nu%(ersis evidentiar5 in nature and is si%p&5 a %atter o/

de/ense, and not a 'round to dis%iss the a%ended 3o%p&aint.

16[16] (d. at 55.

1[1] World Wide Ins. & Surety Co., Inc. v. Manuel, 9) P#i!. / 719558.


11/26

ina&&5, the CA he&d that the rea& Buestion in the 3ase (oi&ed do0n as to

0hose tit&e is 'enuine or spurious, 0hi3h is o(vious&5 a tria(&e issue o/ /a3t 0hi3h

3an on&5 (e threshed out in a tria& on the %erits.

Throu'h the eBua&&5 assai&ed 8e3e%(er ), +7 Reso&ution, the CA denied

!itan'3o&s %otion /or re3onsideration.

Hen3e, the instant petition.

The I&&e

Petitioners !itan'3o& raise as 'round /or revie0 the so&e assi'n%ent o/ error

in that:

THE 8ECISION AN8 THE RESO"$TION O THE TDE"TH 8I!ISION O

THE CO$RT O APPEA"S $N8ER CHA""ENGE ARE CONTRARY TO

"AD);9);

The Co3t& R/0n

1)[1)] Rollo, p. 10.


12/26

The petition is (ere/t o/ %erit.

The so&e issue tendered /or 3onsideration is 0hether the A%ended

Co%p&aint, 0ith the #une );, ); SPAsu(%itted (5 petitioners !itan'3o&du&5

3onsidered, su//i3ient&5 states a 3ause o/ a3tion. It is !itan'3o&s posture that it does

not su//i3ient&5 state a 3ause o/ a3tion. Ne0 !ista is o/ 3ourse o/ a di//erent vie0.

A4ended Co46/a0nt S220'0ent/7 State& a Ca&e o2 A't0on

The Ru&es o/ Court de/ines 3ause o/ a3tion as the a3t or o%ission (5 0hi3h a

part5 vio&ates a ri'ht o/ another. It 3ontains three e&e%ents: 4)6 a ri'ht eistin' in

/avor o/ the p&ainti// 4+6 a 3orre&ative dut5 on the part o/ the de/endant to respe3t

that ri'ht and 4


13/26

"a3 o/ 3ause o/ a3tion is, ho0ever, not a 'round /or a dis%issa& o/ the

3o%p&aint throu'h a %otion to dis%iss under Ru&e )7 o/ the Ru&es o/ Court, /or the

deter%ination o/ a &a3 o/ 3ause o/ a3tion 3an on&5 (e %ade durin' andFor a/ter

tria&. Dhat is dis%issi(&e via that %ode is /ai&ure o/ the 3o%p&aint to state a 3ause

o/ a3tion. Se3. )4'6 o/ Ru&e )7 o/ the Ru&es o/ Court provides that a %otion %a5 (e

%ade on the 'round that the p&eadin' assertin' the 3&ai% states no 3ause o/ a3tion.

The ru&e is that in a %otion to dis%iss, a de/endant h5potheti3a&&5 ad%its the

truth o/ the %ateria& a&&e'ations o/ the u&ti%ate /a3ts 3ontained in the p&ainti//s3o%p&aint.+)9+) Dhen a %otion to dis%iss is 'rounded on the /ai&ure to state a

3ause o/ a3tion, a ru&in' thereon shou&d, as ru&e, (e (ased on&5 on the /a3ts a&&e'ed

in the 3o%p&aint.++9++ Ho0ever, this prin3ip&e o/ h5potheti3a& ad%ission ad%its o/

e3eptions. A%on' others, there is no h5potheti3a& ad%ission o/ 3on3&usions or

interpretations o/ &a0 0hi3h are /a&se &e'a&&5 i%possi(&e /a3ts /a3ts inad%issi(&e

in eviden3e /a3ts 0hi3h appear (5 re3ord or do3u%ent in3&uded in the p&eadin's to

(e un/ounded+


14/26

true+19+1 and 0here the %otion to dis%iss 0as heard 0ith su(%ission o/ eviden3e

0hi3h dis3&oses /a3ts su//i3ient to de/eat the 3&ai%.+29+2

Ne0 !istas thresho&d 3ontention that 8e Gu%ans SPA to se&& shou&d not (e

3onsidered /or not havin' (een in3orporated as part o/ its a%ended 3o%p&aint is

in3orre3t sin3e !itan'3o& du&5 su(%itted that pie3e o/ do3u%ent in 3ourt in the

3ourse o/ the #une *, +1 hearin' on the %otion to dis%iss. Thus, the tria& 3ourt

a3ted 0ithin its dis3retion in 3onsiderin' said SPA re&ative to the %otion to dis%iss

the a%ended 3o%p&aint.

The tria& 3ourt, ho0ever, erred in ru&in' that, tain' said SPA into a33ount,

the a%ended 3o%p&aint stated no 3ause o/ a3tion. Indeed, upon a 3onsideration o/

the a%ended 3o%p&aint, its annees, 0ith the #une );, ); SPA thus su(%itted,

the Court is in3&ined, in the %ain, to a'ree 0ith the appe&&ate 3ourt that the

a%ended 3o%p&aint su//i3ient&5 states a 3ause o/ a3tion.

H76othet0'a/ Ad40&&0on S66o3t& State4ent o2 Ca&e o2 A't0on

2/[2/] $ee Marcopper Corporation v. -arcia, G.+. o. -559*5, Ju!y *0, 19)6, 1/*

$%+A 1)E . Bae/ Electric %ig#t Co+pany v. Ara Electric Cooperative, Inc. , o. -

59/)0, eceber ), 19)2, 119 $%+A 90E Mat#ay v. Consolidated Ban* and (rust

Co+pany , o. -2*1*6, August 26, 19/, 5) $%+A 560E !alandan v. 'ulio, o. -

19101, ;ebruary 29, 196/, 10 $%+A /00.

25[25] (an, supra note 2*.


15/26

Thus, the net Buer5 is: Assu%in' h5potheti3a&&5 the vera3it5 o/ the %ateria&

a&&e'ations in the a%ended 3o%p&aint, (ut tain' into 3onsideration the SPA, 0ou&d

Ne0 !ista sti&& have a 3ause o/ a3tion a'ainst !itan'3o& and @aria A&ipit su//i3ient

to support its 3&ai% /or re&ie/ 3onsistin' pri%ari&5 o/ Buietin' o/ tit&e

The poser shou&d h5potheti3a&&5 (e ans0ered in the a//ir%ative.

In a %otion to dis%iss /or /ai&ure to state a 3ause o/ a3tion, the /o3us is on

the su//i3ien35, not the vera3it5, o/ the %ateria& a&&e'ations.+79+7 The test o/

su//i3ien35 o/ /a3ts a&&e'ed in the 3o%p&aint 3onstitutin' a 3ause o/ a3tion &ies on

0hether or not the 3ourt, ad%ittin' the /a3ts a&&e'ed, 3ou&d render a va&id verdi3t in

a33ordan3e 0ith the pra5er o/ the 3o%p&aint.+*9+* And to sustain a %otion to

dis%iss /or &a3 o/ 3ause o/ a3tion, it %ust (e sho0n that the 3&ai% /or re&ie/ in the

3o%p&aint does not eist, rather than that a 3&ai% has (een de/e3tive&5 stated, or is

a%(i'uous, inde/inite, or un3ertain.+;9+;

Rat020'at0on Wo/d C3e De2e't 0n the SPA

26[26] Malicde+ v. Flores, G.+. o. 151001, $epteber ), 2006, 501 $%+A 2/),

259.

2[2] niversal A0uarius, Inc. v. 1.C. 2u+an Resources Manage+ent Corp. , G.+.

o. 155990, $epteber 12, 200, 5** $%+A *)E Fluor !aniel, Inc."P#ilippines, supra

note 20E Malicde+, id. at 260.

2)[2)] Pioneer Concrete P#ilippines, Inc. v. (odaro, G.+. o. 15/)*0, June ), 200,

52/ $%+A 15*, 162 7citations oitted8.


16/26

There 3an (e Bui((&in' a(out the &ot 3overed (5 the deed o/ a(so&ute sa&e 8e

Gu%an ee3uted in Ne0 !istas /avor (ein' di//erent /ro% that re/erred to in her

ena(&in' po0er o/ attorne5 to se&& in ter%s o/ &ot nu%(er and &ot tit&e nu%(er. The

/&a0 ste%%ed /ro% the /au&t5 preparation o/ the SPA. Not0ithstandin' the

varian3e in &ot des3riptions, as indi3ated a(ove, the a%ended 3o%p&aint 3ontained,

as it 0ere, a 3&ear state%ent o/ Ne0 !istas 3ause o/ a3tion. Ne0 !ista, in /a3t,

a&&e'ed that the intended sa&e o/ "ot No. )*+ e//e3ted (5 8e Gu%an had (een

rati/ied (5 her prin3ipa&s, &ot o0ners C&e%ente and @aria A&ipit. Consider the

ensuin' 3&ear stipu&ations in the Au'ust , ); 8eed o/ A(so&ute Sa&e:

That on @ar3h +*, );, the SE""ERS 9the A&ipits entered into aContra3t to Se&& 0ith the =$YER 9Ne0 !ista, a/ter the5 had previous&5 re3eived

on e(ruar5 )), ); an earnest %one5 o/ TEN THO$SAN8 PESOS

4P),.6, 0herein the5 4Se&&ers6 a'reed to se&& to the =$YER the a(ove-des3ri(ed par3e& o/ &and 4in the redu3ed area o/ +1+,21 sBuare %eters6 /or P7.

per sBuare %eter or /or a tota& pri3e 3onsideration o/ O$RTEEN @I""ION

I!E H$N8RE8 ITY TDO THO$SAN8 O$R H$N8RE8 PESOS4P)1,22+,1.6 under the other ter%s and 3onditions stipu&ated therein

That on Apri& 1, );, the =$YER had advan3ed the a%ount o/ SE!EN

@I""ION I!E H$N8RE8 EIGHTEEN THO$SAN8 SI H$N8RE8PESOS 4*,2);,7.6 and paid the Phi&ippine !eterans =an 9P!= in the sa%e

a%ount (5 0a5 o/ rede%ption o/ the a(ove-des3ri(ed propert5 /ro% its %ort'a'e,

a&& in a33ordan3e 0ith the stipu&ation in the Contra3t to Se&& dated @ar3h +*,);, %ain' the advan3es %ade (5 the =$YER to the SE""ERS na%e&5:

P),. Earnest @one5 P2,. Advan3es and P*,2);,7.

Rede%ption @one5 in the tota& a%ount o/ EIGHT @I""ION TDENTY EIGHT

THO$SAN8 SI H$N8RE8 PESOS 4P;,+;,7.6 0hi3h per a'ree%ent has/or%ed part o/ the pa5%ent o/ the pur3hase pri3e o/ P)1,22,. there(5

&eavin' a (a&an3e o/ SI @I""ION I!E H$N8RE8 TDENTY THREE

THO$SAN8 EIGHT H$N8RE8 PESOS 4P7,2+


17/26


18/26

re%ittan3es o/ 0hat turned out to (e the tota& pur3hase pri3e /or the &ot envisa'ed

to (e pur3hased and so&d, to 0it: PhP ), earnest %one5 pa5%ent on e(ruar5

)), ); an advan3e o/ ha&/ a %i&&ion 4no date provided6 sett&e%ent o/ a %ort'a'e

&oan 0ith Phi&ippine !eterans =an 4P!=6 o/ over PhP *.2 %i&&ion on Apri& 1,

); and the /ina& pa5%ent o/ the (a&an3e o/ the tota& pur3hase pri3e a%ountin' to

over PhP 7.2 %i&&ion on Au'ust , );the date o/ the ee3ution o/ the 8eed o/

A(so&ute Sa&e. or proper perspe3tive, it %a5 (e %entioned that the A&ipits and

Ne0 !ista ee3uted the Contra3t to Se&& on @ar3h +*, ); a/ter the pa5%ent o/

the earnest %one5 and (e/ore the sett&e%ent o/ the %ort'a'e &oan 0ith the P!=

and the SPA ee3uted (5 C&e%ente and @aria A&ipit on #une );, ); or %ore than

a %onth (e/ore the ee3ution o/ the 8eed o/ A(so&ute Sa&e.

Tain' the /ore'oin' events set /orth in the ); deed o/ a(so&ute sa&e, as

h5potheti3a&&5 ad%itted, it is /air&5 evident that the propert5 the A&ipits intended to

se&& and in /a3t so&d 0as the &ot 3overed (5 TCT No. 4+2


19/26

As to ho0 the SPA %entioned a &ot, i.e., "ot No. )*


20/26

one propert5"ot No. )*+. This rea&it5 0ou&d verita(&5 %ae the &ot and TCT

desi'nation and des3ription entries in the SPA as a 3ase o/ t5po'raphi3a& errors.

Rat020'at0on% De/0;e37 and Not


21/26

0ere indeed to authorie 8e Gu%an to se&& a propert5 other than "ot No. )*+, is

it not (ut &o'i3a& to surrender that other propert5 to Ne0 !ista And i/ Ne0 !ista

e%p&o5ed i&&e'a& %eans to 'ain possession o/ su(?e3t propert5, a re&ative&5 va&ua(&e

pie3e o/ rea& estate, 0h5 did C&e%ente and @aria A&ipit, and their su33essors in

interest, not institute an5 pro3eedin's to oust or e?e3t Ne0 !ista there/ro%

C&e%ente and @aria A&ipits &on' ina3tion adverted to ar'ues a'ainst the

notion that 0hat the5 so&d to Ne0 !ista 0as a propert5 other than "ot No. )*+ o/

the Ca&a%(a Estate.

T8o Ve3&0on& o2 TCT Co;e30n S5:e't Lot Sho8 F3ad

"est it (e over&ooed, the purported sa&e o/ "ot )*+ to !itan'3o& 0as %ade (5 @aria A&ipit a&one, ostensi(&5 uti&iin' another 3erti/i3ate o/ tit&e (earin'

nu%(er TCT No. 4+2


22/26

It is 0orth to %ention at this ?un3ture that the deed o/ a(so&ute sa&e in /avor

o/ Ne0 !ista re3ited the /o&&o0in' event: that the RTC, =ran3h


23/26


24/26

Asso3iate #usti3e

DE CONC$R:

CONSUELO =NARES>SANTIAGO

Asso3iate #usti3e

Chairperson

MINITA V. CHICO>NA?ARIO ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA

Asso3iate #usti3e Asso3iate #usti3e


25/26

DIOSDADO M. PERALTA

Asso3iate #usti3e

A T T E S T A T I O N

I attest that the 3on3&usions in the a(ove 8e3ision had (een rea3hed in

3onsu&tation (e/ore the 3ase 0as assi'ned to the 0riter o/ the opinion o/ the Courts

8ivision.

CONSUELO =NARES>SANTIAGO

Asso3iate #usti3e

Chairperson

C E R T I F I C A T I O N


26/26

6. Vitangcol vs New Vista Properties

Documents

Transcript of 6. Vitangcol vs New Vista Properties