This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2008-09-17 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The law provides protection to third person, who believing in good faith and relying on the sweet representations of some evil minded persons, may be unjustifiably inveigled to enter into a contract or transaction not knowing that the subject real property has been encumbered or sold. It is the duty of the buyer or vendee to register the transaction before the Register of Deeds of the province or city where the property lies. The registration is intended to inform any minded individual that the property has been subjected to a prior transaction and that entering into any further contract involving the same property shall be at his own risk. In the event that any third person was bona fide tricked to enter into any transaction involving the same property because the transferee or vendee failed to register the same as required by law, the latter's interests should be subordinated to that of the third party. Axiomatic is the rule in this jurisdiction that when loss or damage was caused to two individuals who both acted in good faith but one is negligent, the loss or damage shall fall upon the one who acted negligently. Citing a myriad of jurisprudence[6], the CA declared that respondents, as attaching creditors who registered the order of attachment and the sale of the property to them as the highest bidders, acquired a valid title to the disputed property as against petitioners who had previously bought the same property from the registered owner but failed to register their deed of sale. | |||||
|
2002-10-15 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| attachment and the sale by public auction of the property to him as the highest bidder acquires a superior title to the property as against a vendee who previously bought the same property from the registered owner but who failed to register his deed of sale.[24] Petitioners Garcias failed to show that BSC acted in bad faith which would have impelled this Court to rule otherwise. | |||||