This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-11-14 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| On June 28, 1965, Emilio's children of the first marriage executed a General Power of Attorney (GPA) in favor of Rita. On July 29, 1971, Benjamin and Rita executed a Deed of Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate, declaring themselves as the sole and only heirs of Emilio and Eleuteria, and adjudicating unto themselves the subject property, 1,000 sq m of which to Rita and the remaining 564 sq m to Benjamin.[12] Pursuant to said Deed, TCT No. 18550 was cancelled and TCT No. 170385 was issued in the name of Rita and Benjamin. The latter title was further cancelled and two (2) new TCTs were issued, namely, TCT No. 171639 in the name of Benjamin corresponding to his share of the subject property and TCT No. 171640 in the name of Rita for her share.[13] | |||||
|
2011-11-14 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| In a special civil action for certiorari, the CA found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the RTC in issuing the above orders. The CA pointed out that the assailed order of execution did not amend the March 15, 1989 decision sought to be executed.[40] It explained that the order of execution merely clarified the dispositive portion of the decision with reference to the other portions thereof.[41] It found that the parcels of land in the name of petitioners form part of the decision as they originated from the mother title TCT No. 18550 against which the execution may be had in favor of respondents.[42] As to the non-inclusion of Norma as indispensable party in the reconveyance case, the appellate court applied the rule on estoppel by laches, considering that Norma was very much aware of the existence of the litigations involving the subject property.[43] Finally, on petitioners' claim of the indefeasibility of the Torrens title, the CA stressed that mere issuance of the certificate of title does not foreclose the possibility that the property may be under co-ownership with persons not named in the title.[44] | |||||