Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 175763 2012-04-11	HEIRS OF BIENVENIDO v. SALOME E. GABRIEL VILLARAMA, JR., J.
An action for annulment of title or reconveyance based on fraud is imprescriptible where the plaintiff is in possession of the property subject of the acts.[35] The totality of the evidence on record established that it was petitioners who are in actual possession of the subject property; respondents merely insinuated at occasional visits to the land. However, for an action for reconveyance based on fraud to prosper, this Court has held that the party seeking reconveyance must prove by clear and convincing evidence his title to the property and the fact of fraud.[36]
	GR No. 159284 2009-01-27	HEIRS OF BERNARDO ULEP NAMELY: DOLORES ULEP v. SPS. CRISTOBAL DUCAT AND FLORA KIONG AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
(e) Did the Court of Appeals commit a very grave error when it reversed the Resolution of the RTC and reinstated the decision of the MTC?[16] It is well-settled that in order for an action for reconveyance based on fraud to succeed, the party seeking reconveyance must prove by clear and convincing evidence his title to the property and the fact of fraud.[17]