Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
4
Aggabao vs. Parulan (MJ) brother Dionisio authorizing him to sell both lots. At Atanacio’s instance, the petitioners
Topic : O wnership, administration and enjoyment; Joint administration met on March 25, 1991 with Atty. Parulan at the Manila Peninsula. They were
accompanied by one Atty. Olandesca. They recalled that Atty. Parulan “smugly demanded
FACTS : In January 1991, real estate broker Marta K. Atanacio offered 2 lots located in P800,000.00” in exchange for the duplicate owner’s copy of TCT, because Atty. Parulan
Parañaque to the petitioners. On February 2, 1991, the petitioners met up with Elena represented the current value of the property to be P1.5 million. As a counter-offer,
Parulan at the site of the property and showed them the Owner’s original copy of the TCT however, they tendered P250,000.00, which Atty. Parulan declined, giving them only until
of the 2 lots; tax declarations; and a copy of the special power of attorney dated January April 5, 1991 to decide. Hearing nothing more from the petitioners, Atty. Parulan decided
7, 1991 executed by Dionisio authorizing Elena to sell the property. The petitioners paid to call them on April 5, 1991, but they informed him that they had already fully paid to
P200,000.00 as earnest money for which Elena executed a handwritten Receipt of Earnest Elena.
Money which stipulated that the peitioners would pay an additional payment of
P130,000.00 on February 4, 1991; P650,000.00 on or before February 15, 1991 and P700, Thus, on April 15, 1991, Dionisio, through Atty. Parulan, commenced an action (Civil Case
000.00 on March 31, 1991 once Elena turned over the property. No. 91-1005 entitled Dionisio Z. Parulan, Jr., represented by Jeremy Z. Parulan, as attorney
in fact, v. Ma. Elena Parulan, Sps. Rex and Coney Aggabao), praying for the declaration of
On February 4, 1991, the petitioners, accompanied by the broker, went to the Office of the the nullity of the deed of absolute sale executed by Ma. Elena, and the cancellation of the
Register of Deeds to verify the TCTs shown by Elena. There they discovered that one of title issued to the petitioners by virtue thereof. In turn, the petitioners filed on July 12, 1991
the lots had been encumbered to Banco Filipino, but that the encumbrance had been their own action for specific performance with damages against the respondents. Both
cancelled due to the full payment of the obligation. They noticed that the loan was cases were consolidated for trial and judgment in the RTC.
effected through and SPA executed by Dionisio in favor of Elena. The other lot on the other
hand had an annotation of an existing mortgage in favor of Los Baños Rural Bank, with the On July 26, 2000, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 136, in Makati City annulled the
same SPA with a court order authorizing Elena to mortgage the lot to secure the loan. deed of absolute sale executed in favor of the petitioners covering two parcels of
registered land the respondents owned for want of the written consent of respondent
The petitioners and the broker next inquired about the mortgage and the court order at the husband Dionisio Parulan, Jr. The CA affirmed the RTC decision.
Los Baños Rural Bank. There, they met with Atty. Zarate, related that the bank had asked
for the court order because the lot involved was conjugal property. ISSUE : Which between Article 173 of the Civil Code and Article 124 of the Family Code
should apply to the sale of the conjugal property executed without the consent of
Following their verification, the petitioners delivered P130,000.00 as additional down Dionisio?
payment on February 4, 1991; and P650,000.00 to the Los Baños Rural Bank on February
12, 1991, which then released the owner’s duplicate copy of TCT to them. HELD: Article 124 of FC applies to sale of conjugal properties made after the effectivity of
the Family Code
On March 18, 1991, the petitioners delivered the final amount of P700,000.00 to Elena,
who executed a deed of absolute sale in their favor. However, Elena did not turn over the The petitioners submit that Article 173 of the CivilCode, not Article 124 of the Family Code,
owner’s duplicate copy of the TCT claiming that said copy was in the possession of a governed the property relations of the respondents because they had been married prior
relative who was then in Hong Kong. She assured them that the owner’s duplicate copy of to the effectivity of the Family Code; and that the second paragraph of Article 124 of the
TCT would be turned over after a week. Family Code should not apply because the other spouse held the administration over the
conjugal property. They argue that notwithstanding his absence from the country Dionisio
On March 19, 1991, TCT was cancelled and a new one was issued in the name of the still held the administration of the conjugal property by virtue of his execution of the SPA
petitioners. Elena did not turn over the duplicate owner’s copy of TCT as promised. In due in favor of his brother; and that even assuming that Article 124 of the Family Code
time, the petitioners learned that the duplicate owner’s copy of TCT had been all along in properly applied, Dionisio ratified the sale through Atty. Parulan’s counter-offer during the
the custody of Atty. Jeremy Z. Parulan, who appeared to hold an SPA executed by his March 25, 1991 meeting.
12
Santero v. CFI, 153 SCRA 728 (MJ)
Topic: Support during CPG liquidation, FC 133 ISSUE : Are the private respondents entitled to allowance? And whether it was proper for
the court a quo to grant the motion for allowance without hearing?
FACTS :
This is a Petition for certiorari which questions the order of the respondent court granting RULING : Yes, they are entitled. The Court find that the present petition obviously lacks
the Motion for Allowance filed by private respondents. merit, hence petition dismissed.
Pablo Santero, the only legitimate son of Pascual and Simona Santero, had three children Being of age, gainfully employed, or married should not be regarded as the determining
with Felixberta Pacursa namely, Princesita, Federico and Willie (here in petitioners). He factor to their right to allowance under Articles 290 and 188 of the New Civil Code.
also had four children with Anselma Diaz namely, Victor, Rodrigo, Anselmina, and Miguel
Art. 290. Support is everything that is indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing and
(herein private respondents). These children are all natural children since neither of their
medical attendance, according tothe social position of the family.
mothers was married to their father.
Support also includes the education of the person entitled to be supported until he
In 1973, Pablo Santero died. During the pendency of the administration proceedings with completes his education or training for some profession, trade or vocation, even beyond the
the CFI-Cavite involving the estate of the late Pablo Santero, petitioners filed a petition for age of majority.
certiorari with the Supreme Court questioning the decision of CFI-Cavite granting
allowance (allegedly without hearing) in the amount of Php 2,000.00, to private Art. 188. From the common mass of property support shall be given to the surviving
respondents which includes tuition fees, clothing materials and subsistence out of any spouse and to the children during the liquidation of the inventoried property and until what
belongs to them is delivered; but from this shall be deducted that amount received for
available funds in the hands of the administrator.
support which exceeds the fruits or rents pertaining to them.
The petitioners opposed said decision on the ground that private respondents were no While the Rules of Court limit allowances to the widow and minor or incapacitated children
longer studying, that they have attained the age of majority, that all of them except for of the deceased, the New Civil Code gives the surviving spouse and his/her children
Miguel are gainfully employed, and the administrator did not have sufficient funds to cover without distinction. Hence, the private respondents Victor, Rodrigo, Anselmina and Miguel
the said expenses. all surnamed Santero are entitled to allowances as advances from their shares in the
inheritance from their father Pablo Santero. Since the provision of the Civil Code, a
Before the Supreme Court could act on said petition, the private respondents filed another substantive law, gives the surviving spouse and to the children the right to receive support
motion for allowance with the CFI-Cavite which included Juanita, Estelita and Pedrito, all during the liquidation of the estate of the deceased, such right cannot be impaired by Rule
surnamed Santero, as children of the late Pablo Santero with Anselma Diaz, praying that a 83 Sec. 3 of the Rules of Court which is a procedural rule. Be it noted however that with
sum of Php 6,000.00 be given to each of the seven children as their allowance from the respect to "spouse," the same must be the "legitimate spouse" (not common-law spouses
estate of their father. This was granted by the CFI-Cavite. who are the mothers of the children here).
Later on, the CFI-Cavite issued an amended order directing Anselma Diaz, mother of Records show that a hearing was made. Moreover, what the said court did was just to
private respondents, to submit a clarification or explanation as to the additional three follow the precedent of the court which granted previous allowance and that the
children included in the said motion. She said in her clarification that in her previous petitioners and private respondents only received Php 1,500.00 each depending on the
motions, only the last four minor children were included for support and the three children availability of funds.
were then of age should have been included since all her children have the right to receive
allowance as advance payment of their shares in the inheritance of Pablo Santero. The
CFI-Cavite issued an order directing the administrator to get back the allowance of the
three additional children based on the opposition of the petitioners.
23