Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 495 views

    61 Dalion Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Sudo Nim
    (1) Segundo Dalion denied selling a parcel of land to Ruperto Sabesaje Jr., claiming his signature on the deed of sale was forged. However, witnesses testified that Dalion signed the deed. (2) The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, finding Dalion's signature to be authentic based on witness testimony and signature comparisons. (3) The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that while the sale was documented in a private instrument, it was still valid and binding between the parties. The trial court properly ordered Dalion to execute a public deed of conveyance since the private sale contract had already been perfected.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    61 Dalion Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Sudo Nim
    495 views2 pages
    (1) Segundo Dalion denied selling a parcel of land to Ruperto Sabesaje Jr., claiming his signature on the deed of sale was forged. However, witnesses testified that Dalion signed the deed. (2) The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, finding Dalion's signature to be authentic based on witness testimony and signature comparisons. (3) The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that while the sale was documented in a private instrument, it was still valid and binding between the parties. The trial court properly ordered Dalion to execute a public deed of conveyance since the private sale contract had already been perfected.

    Original Title

    61 Dalion vs CA.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    (1) Segundo Dalion denied selling a parcel of land to Ruperto Sabesaje Jr., claiming his signature on the deed of sale was forged. However, witnesses testified that Dalion signed the deed. (2) The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, finding Dalion's signature to be authentic based on witness testimony and signature comparisons. (3) The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that while the sale was documented in a private instrument, it was still valid and binding between the parties. The trial court properly ordered Dalion to execute a public deed of conveyance since the private sale contract had already been perfected.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    495 views2 pages

    61 Dalion Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Sudo Nim
    (1) Segundo Dalion denied selling a parcel of land to Ruperto Sabesaje Jr., claiming his signature on the deed of sale was forged. However, witnesses testified that Dalion signed the deed. (2) The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling, finding Dalion's signature to be authentic based on witness testimony and signature comparisons. (3) The Supreme Court upheld the Court of Appeals' decision, finding that while the sale was documented in a private instrument, it was still valid and binding between the parties. The trial court properly ordered Dalion to execute a public deed of conveyance since the private sale contract had already been perfected.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    61 Dalion vs CA One of the witnesses, Gerardo Ogsoc, even said that in preparing the

    Formation of Contract of Sale > Formalities of Contract > General Rule: questioned deed of sale, he had copied he boundaries from the old deed of
    Form not important sale executed by Saturnina. CA said Dalion did not substantiate his claim of
    forgery, and that the signature specimen comparisons show convincing
    SPS. SEGUNDO DALION AND EPIFANIA SABESAJE-DALION, petitioners, vs. proof that it was he who signed the deed.
    THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS AND RUPERTO SABESAJE, JR.,
    respondents. In the instant petition to the SC, Dalion argues that (1) his signature was
    forged, and (2) since the sale is embodied in a private document, it did not
    G.R. No. 78903| February 18, 1990| J. Medialdea| [ MAOI ] convey title because of Art 1358 of the Civil Code:
    Doctrine: A sale of a real property may be in a private instrument but that "…acts and contracts which have for their object the creation,
    contract is valid and binding between the parties upon its perfection. A party transmission, modification or extinction of real rights over
    may compel the other to execute a public instrument embodying their immovable property must appear in a public instrument."
    contract to affect real rights once the contract has been perfected.
    ISSUES AND RATIO
    Nature: Petition to annul CA Decision upholding the validity of sale of a parcel
    of land by Segundo Dalion in favor of Ruperto Sabesaje Jr. The SC upholds the findings of the CA as to the validity of Dalion’s
    signature.
    FACTS
    Sole Issue: Is it true that no title transferred because the sale was not in a
    On May 28, 1973, Ruperto Sabesaje sued to recover ownership of a parcel public instrument?
    of land, based on a private document of Absolute Sale, allegedly executed
    by Segundo Dalion. Sabesaje and Dalion are relatives. NO. A contract of sale, which is a consensual contract, is perfected by
    mere consent. No particular form is required for its validity. Upon
    Dalion denied the sale, contending that his signature was forged on the perfection, the parties may reciprocally demand performance.
    document, and the subject land is conjugal property which he and his wife
    bought from Saturnina Sabesaje. The trial court rightly ordered Dalion to deliver to Sabesaje the parcel of
    land, and execute a formal deed of conveyance in a public instrument. A
    Additionally, Sabesaje claims that after executing the assailed deed of sale, sale of a real property may be in a private instrument but that contract is
    Sps. Dalion pleaded with him to be the administrators of the land because valid and binding between the parties upon its perfection. And a party may
    Mr. Dalion had no livelihood. Sps. Dalion denied this, but admitted that they compel the other party to execute a public instrument embodying their
    were already administering several parcels of land owned by Sabesaje’s contract to affect real rights once the contract appearing in a private
    grandfather. instrument has been perfected.
    TRIAL COURT - The trial court decided in favor of Sabesaje, ordering the DISPOSITIVE
    spouses to deliver the property and pay P2,000 atty’s fees and P500
    litigation expenses and the costs. Sps Dalion appealed to the CA. ACCORDINGLY, the petition is DENIED and the decision of the Court of
    Appeals upholding the ruling of the trial court is hereby AFFIRMED. No
    COURT OF APPEALS - The CA affirmed, and upheld the validity of the sale. It costs.
    ruled that Dalion’s signature on the document is authentic. The witnesses to
    the execution of the deed of sale positively testified as to its authenticity. NO SEPARATE OPINIONS

    You might also like