This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2001-11-21 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| Let us now apply the foregoing discussion to the present issue. From the peculiar facts of this case, it is clear that petitioner never took actual control and possession of the property sold, in view of respondent's timely objection to the sale and the continued actual possession of the property. The objection took the form of a court action impugning the sale which, as we know, was rescinded by a judgment rendered by this Court in the mother case. It has been held that the execution of a contract of sale as a form of constructive delivery is a legal fiction. It holds true only when there is no impediment that may prevent the passing of the property from the hands of the vendor into those of the vendee.[28] When there is such impediment, "fiction yields to reality - the delivery has not been effected."[29] | |||||