[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
546 views1 page

Pino v. CA Digest

1) Rafaela originally owned a lot with her sons Raymundo and Cicero after her husband Juan died. She then sold portions of the lot in 1967 and later, eventually selling the entire lot to Pino in 1970. 2) The issue is whether Pino is an innocent purchaser for value given he registered the sale in 1970. 3) The court ruled yes, that as the certificate of title was in the hands of the vendor Rafaela during the sale, Pino had the right to rely on what was stated in the certificate of title without needing to investigate further, making him an innocent purchaser for value.

Uploaded by

Aubrey Palarca Pospos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
546 views1 page

Pino v. CA Digest

1) Rafaela originally owned a lot with her sons Raymundo and Cicero after her husband Juan died. She then sold portions of the lot in 1967 and later, eventually selling the entire lot to Pino in 1970. 2) The issue is whether Pino is an innocent purchaser for value given he registered the sale in 1970. 3) The court ruled yes, that as the certificate of title was in the hands of the vendor Rafaela during the sale, Pino had the right to rely on what was stated in the certificate of title without needing to investigate further, making him an innocent purchaser for value.

Uploaded by

Aubrey Palarca Pospos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

PINO V.

CA
198 SCRA 434 (1991)

FACTS: Subject lot was originally owned by spouses Juan and Rafaela. When Juan
died ownership was transferred to Rafaela and her two sons: Raymundo and Cicero.
The lot was then sold to Rafaela who acquired title thereto. She first sold a portion
of the lot in 1967, then sold the other portion later. Ownership was eventually sold
to Pino who registered the sale in 1970. In 1980 Cicero died and his heirs instituted
suit for nullity and reconveyance against Pino.

ISSUE: WON Pino is an innocent purchaser for value.

RULING: Yes. Where the certificate of title is in the hands of the vendor when the
land is sold, the vendee for value has the right to rely on what appears on the
certificate of title. In the absence of anything to excite or arouse suspicion, the
vendee is under no obligation to look beyond the certificate and investigate the title
of the vendor.
The main purpose of the Torrens system is to avoid possible conflicts of title to real
estate and to facilitate transactions relative thereto by giving the public the right to
rely upon the face of the TCT and dispense with the need for inquiring further
except when the party concerned has actual knowledge of facts and circumstances
that should impel a reasonably cautious man to make such further inquiry.
The action had already prescribed because it was filed 15 years after the sale and
issuance of TCT in 1967. The remedy for the petitioner is to bring action for
damages against those who caused the fraud.

You might also like