Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CARBONELL vs. CA
FACTS:
Private respondent Poncio was the owner of a parcel of land in batanes, mortgaged in favor of
republic savings bank. Petitioner Carbonell and respondent Infante both offered to buy the
property from Poncio. Poncio, in his failure to pay the mortgaged, agreed for the petitioner to
buy the land excluding his house on the condition that from the purchase price would come from
the money to be paid to the bank.
Subsequently, Poncio had told Carbonell that the former can no longer pursue with the sale for he
had given the land to Infante. The said lot was fenced by Infante.
Informed that the sale in favor of respondent Infante had not yet been registered, Atty. Garcia
(carbonells counsel) prepared an adverse claim for petitioner, and registered the same on February
8, 1955.
The deed of sale in favor of Infante was registered only on February 12, 1955. As a consequence
thereof, a Transfer Certificate of Title was issued to her but with the annotation of the adverse
claim of petitioner Carbonell.
Petitioner filed a complaint, praying that the sale between Poncio and Infante be declared null and
void.
ISSUE:
HELD:
The SC declared the first buyer Carbonell to have the superior right over the property, relying on
article 1544, to wit:
If the same thing should have been sold to different vendees, the ownership shall be transferred
to the person who may have first taken possession thereof in good faith, if it should movable
property.
Should it be immovable property, the ownership shall belong to the person acquiring it who in
good faith first recorded it in the Registry of Property. xxx
The second paragraph of said article directs that ownership of immovable property should be
recognized in favor of one who in good faith first recorded his right. Good fait must
characterize the act of anterior registration.
When CArbonell bought the lot from poncio, she was the only buyer thereof and the title of
poncio was still in his name solely encumbered by a bank mortgage duly annotated thereon.
Carbonell was not aware and she could not have been aware of any sale to Infante as there
was no such sale to Infante then. Under the circumstances, the recording of Carbonells adverse
claim should be deemed to have been done in good faith and should emphasize Infantes bad
faith when the latter registered her deed of sale only 4 days after Catbonells registration of
adverse claim.