Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2011 > February 2011 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 171464 : February 23, 2011] SPOUSES ELISEO R. BAUTISTA AND EMPERATRIZ C. BAUTISTA VS. SPOUSES MILA JALANDONI & ANTONIO JALANDONI AND MANILA CREDIT CORPORATION :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 23 February 2011 which reads as follows: 

G.R. No. 171464 (Spouses Eliseo R. Bautista and Emperatriz C. Bautista vs. Spouses Mila Jalandoni & Antonio Jalandoni and Manila Credit Corporation).� The spouses Mila and Antonio Jalandoni (Jalandonis) were the owners of two (2) parcels of land located in Alabang, Muntinlupa City covered by Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. (TCT) 201048 and 201049. In May 1997, they discovered that TCT Nos. 201048 and 201049 were cancelled and TCT Nos. 205624 and 206091 respectively, were issued in the name of spouses Eliseo and Emperatriz Bautista (Bautistas). In their complaint, the Jalandonis averred that the cancellation and transfer of the two titles were made possible by two deeds of sale dated April 4, 1996 and May 4, 1996, purportedly executed by them; and that their signatures appearing in the two deeds of sale were forged. To prove ownership thereof, the Jalandonis asserted that the titles to the subject properties were still in their possession and had not been surrendered to anyone much less to the Bautistas.

For their part, the Bautistas denied the allegations and contended that sometime in March 1996, a certain Teresita Nasino (Nasiuo) approached them and offered to sell the subject properties for One Million Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P1,200,000.00) and that the subject properties were sold at a bargain price because the owners were in dire need of money. The Bautistas alleged that Nasino showed photocopies of the titles of the subject lands and told them that she would coordinate with the owners, prepare the necessary documents and have the sale registered with the Register of Deeds. Since Nasino was the wife of a friend, the Bautistas gave her the authority to negotiate with the owners of the subject properties. When Nasino informed them that the deeds of sale had already been signed by the Jalandonis, they also signed the same and gave Nasino the amount of P1,200,000.00 as payment thereof. After payment of taxes, new titles, TCT Nos. 205624 and 206091, were issued in their favor.

In order to secure a loan from Manila Credit Corporation (MCC), the Bautistas executed a real estate mortgage over TCT No. 206091 and when they failed to pay the same, they mortgaged the parcel of land covered by TCT No. 205624 as additional security.

On December 17, 2004, the RTC rendered a decision declaring the mortgage lieu of respondent MCC over TCT Nos. 205624 and 206091 valid, legal and enforceable and ordered the Bautistas to pay the Jalandonis actual damages in the amount of P1,320,000.00 for each lot, moral and exemplary damages plus attorney's fees.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision of the RTC with modification that the actual damages were increased to P1,700,000.00 and P3,493,379.82 for the property covered by TCT No. 205624 and TCT No. 206091, respectively.

Both the Jalandonis and the Bautistas filed their respective motions for reconsideration. In an amended decision, the CA declared the sale null and void for failure of the Baulistas to present a special power of attorney authorizing Nasino to sell the subject properties. The fallo of the decision reads: 

WHEREFORE, except for the dismissal of the appeal instituted by defendants-appellants spouses Eliseo Bautista and Emperatriz Bautista, the dispositive portion of Our Decision dated September 30, 2005 is hereby amended to read as follows: 

1. Declaring null and void Transfer Certificates of Titles Nos. 205624 and 206091 in the name of defendants-appellants Spouses Eliseo Bautista and Emperatriz Bautista;
    
2. Nullifying the Real Estate Mortgage constituted on the lots covered by Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. 205624 and 206091 by defendant-appellant Eliseo Bautista in favor of defendant-appellee Manila Credit Corporation:
    
3. Ordering the Register of Deeds of Muntinlupa City to reinstate Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 201048 and 201049 in the name of plaintiff-appellant Spouses Mila Jalandoni and Antonio Jalandoni, free from any mortgage or lien:
    
4. Defendants-appellants Spouses Eliseo Bautista and Emperatriz Bautista are liable to pay their obligation under the Promissory notes they executed in favor of defendant-appellee Manila Credit Corporation;
    
5. Ordering defendants-appellants jointly and severally to pay plaintiffs-appellants the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) by way of moral damages:
    
6. Ordering defendants-appellants jointly and severally to pay plaintiffs-appellants the amount of Twenty Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) by way of exemplary damages; and,
    
7. Ordering defendants-appellants jointly and severally to pay plaintiffs-appellants the amount of Twenty Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) by way of attorney's fees.

SO ORDERED."

Consequently, MCC filed a motion for reconsideration. To date, the said motion has not been resolved by the CA.

On the other hand, the Bautistas filed the present appeal, contending that: (1) the CA erred in finding that the Bautistas were not buyers in good faith; and (2) the CA erred in ruling that TCT Nos. 205624 and 206091 in the name of the Bautistas should be annulled and in ordering the latter to pay actual, moral and exemplary damages and attorney's fees.

On September 26, 2007, the petition was given due course and the parties have submitted their respective memoranda. However, deciding this petition on its merit would certainly pre-empt the CA in resolving the motion for reconsideration of respondent MCC.

WHEREFORE, the Court of Appeals is directed to RESOLVE Manila Credit Corporation's motion for reconsideration with dispatch.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Clerk of Court

By:

(Sgd.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZON
Asst. Clerk of Court