Emas vs Zuzuarregui

Chester Cabalza recommends his visitors to please read the original & full text of the case cited. Xie xie!

Emas vs Zuzuarregui
G.R. No. I-29937
July 12, 1929

Facts:

This action was instituted in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Tarlac by Lucio Emas against Antonio de Zuzuarregui and Faustino Aguilar, to obtain a decree of nullity with respect to transfer certificate of title No. 1024, purporting to show that De Zuzuarregui is the owner of the parcel of land described in said certificate, with the building thereon, in so far as affects as undivided half interest in said parcel claimed by the plaintiff, and to obtain an order for the cancellation of said certificate. The defendant Aguilar appears to be mortgagee of the whole parcel by contract of mortgage executed in his favor by De Zuzuarregui and noted in the certificate. The plaintiff therefore also seeks to obtain the annulment of said mortgage, in so far as affects the undivided half of the property claimed by the plaintiff.

Upon hearing the cause the trial court found that the plaintiff Emas, from Lapaz, Tarlac, is the owner of the undivided half interest claimed by him in the parcel covered by the certificate in question and ordered that the duplicate of the transfer certificate No. 1024 be surrendered and that the certificate be cancelled, not only as to the title but as to the mortgage in favor of Aguilar, in so far as affects the plaintiff's half of the property, with costs against De Zuzuarregui, to enforce his rights under the mortgage against the half of the property pertaining to his mortgagor, De Zuzuarregui. From this judgment the defendants, De Zuzuarregui and Faustino Aguilar, appealed.

Issue:

Whether or not accused-appellant committed falsification of public document?

Held:

Upon general principles of jurisprudence it is self evident that the defendant De Zuzuarregui acquired no right whatever in the property in question by the virtue of the forged deed. But it is contended, that he acquired the undivided half interest which was the subject of conveyance in said deed by virtue of issuance of the issuance to him of the transfer certificate No. 1024.

With respect to the alleged rights of the defendant Faustino Aguilar based upon the mortgage executed in his favor by De Zuzuarregui, we not that reliance is made by this appellant exclusively on the annotation appearing on the back of certificate No. 1024, showing that the property has been mortgaged by De Zuzuarregui, to Aguilar, as already stated in this opinion. But the mortgage itself was not introduced in this evidence, and no proof was submitted on the part of Aguilar tending to show that he had advanced the money mentioned in the annotation upon the faith of the mortgage.

In National Bank vs. Tang On Zse (51 Phil., 317.), it was held that, although an annotation of this character on a Torrens certificate is an effective notice of the execution of the document, such annotation nevertheless does not supply original proof of the terms of the contract. Moreover, Aguilar's title is derived from the contaminated source, and it is incumbent upon him to prove that ha is in fact, to the extent of his mortgage credit, an innocent purchaser of the property in good faith. In the absence of such proof, no error was committed on the part of the trial court in ignoring his alleged rights.