Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1907 > October 1907 Decisions > G.R. No. L-3694 October 21, 1907 - JULIANA BONCAN v. SMITH

009 Phil 109:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-3694. October 21, 1907. ]

JULIANA BONCAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SMITH, BELL & CO., AND J. J. PETERSON, sheriff of the city of Manila, Defendants-Appellees.

Marcelo Caringal, for Appellant.

Kinney and Lawrence, for Appellees.

SYLLABUS


1. EVIDENCE; ADMISSIBILITY. — An unregistered title to real estate is admissible in evidence to show a transfer of ownership as against an attaching creditor.

2. ATTACHMENT; UNRECORDED DEED. — The levy of an execution against a judgment debtor upon realty standing in his name does not take precedence over an unrecorded deed to the same property made by the judgment debtor prior to the levy. Creditors in such cases are not third parties within the meaning of article 389 of the Mortgage Law. (Fabian v. Smith, Bell & Co., 8 Phil. Rep., 496.)


D E C I S I O N


JOHNSON, J. :


From the record it appears that some time prior to the commencement of this action (the 16th of March, 1906) the defendants herein, Smith, Bell & Co., in a cause, No. 4391, pending in the Court of First Instance of the city of Manila, obtained a judgment against Emiliano Boncan, and that on or about the 1st day of March, 1906, the said defendants Smith, Bell & Co. had an order of execution issued against the defendant in that cause, Emiliano Boncan, and had the said execution levied upon the real property described in the complaint in this cause.

On the 16th day of March, 1906, the plaintiff herein commenced an action in the Court of First Instance of the city of Manila, praying that she be declared to be the owner of the said land in question, with right to the possession of the same, and that the said attachment levied by virtue of the judgment which the defendants, Smith, Bell & Co., had obtained against the said Emiliano Boncan be dissolved and that the defendants be charged with the costs of the action.

The defendants, Smith, Bell & Co., by means of their attorneys filed a general denial in said cause. After hearing the evidence adduced during the trial of said cause, the judge of the lower court denied the petition of the plaintiff and refused to dissolve the said attachment, and dismissed the said cause with costs against the plaintiff. From this decision the plaintiff appealed to this court.

An examination of the evidence brought to this court shows the following facts:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. That Francisca Yap de Boncan died on the 22d day of July, 1905, in the city of Manila, leaving certain property to her heirs.

2. That the plaintiff, Juliana Boncan, was one of the heirs and entitled to a distributive share of the estate of Francisca Yap de Boncan.

3. That Emiliano Boncan was one of the heirs of the said Francisca and entitled to a distributive share of the said state.

4. That Emiliano Boncan, by virtue of being an heir and entitled to a distributive share of the estate of the said Francisca, owned a one-sixth part of the property described in the said complaint.

5. That on the 20th day of August, 1905, the said Emiliano Boncan, by means of a public document, sold and transferred all his right, title, and interest in the said land to the plaintiff herein, Juliana Boncan, for the sum of P2,500.

6. That the defendants in this cause neither alleged nor attempted to prove that the sale of the land in question by Emiliano Boncan to the said Juliana Boncan was not a valid sale and a transfer of all the right, title, and interest which the said Emiliano Boncan had in said land.

The deed of transfer by the said Emiliano Boncan to the said Julian Boncan appears to be regular in form and in compliance with the forms prescribed by law. (See sec. 127, Act No. 496.)

The defendants during the trial of the cause in the lower court objected to the introduction of said deed as evidence for the purpose of showing that the title which Emiliano Boncan had in said land had been transferred to Juliana Boncan, for the reason:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. That the said deed had not been registered in accordance with the provisions of the Commercial Code; and

2. That the same had not been signed by both parties, in accordance with the provisions of the Spanish Law.

This court has recently decided in the case of Fabian, Et. Al. v. Smith, Bell & Co. 1 (5 Off. Gaz., 576) that an unregistered deed is admissible in evidence to show a transfer of title as against an attaching creditor, holding that the attaching creditor was not "third persons" mentioned in article 389 of the Mortgage Law, and that the levy of an execution against a judgment debtor upon real estate which stands in his name does not take precedence over an unrecorded deed to the same property made by the judgment debtor prior to the levy in question. The deed to the land in question, therefore, was admissible in evidence for the purpose of showing that the title which Emiliano Boncan had in the said land had been transferred to the said Juliana Boncan, and until this deed is set aside by competent authority the same will stand, showing that the interest thereby conveyed belongs to Juliana Boncan.

With reference to the second objection above noted, to wit, that the deed had not been signed by both grantor and grantee, we are of the opinion, and so hold, that in this respect the deed in question complied with section 127 of Act No. 496.

The evidence presented during the trial of the cause on the part of the plaintiff shows clearly that the land in question had been transferred by Emiliano Boncan to Juliana Boncan several months prior to the attachment levied upon said property in favor of the defendants. This being true, the said attachment was levied upon the property of Juliana Boncan and not upon the property of Emiliano Boncan, and therefore was illegally levied and the same is hereby dissolved.

The judgment of the lower court is therefore hereby reversed. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Willard, and Tracey, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. 8 Phil. Rep. 496.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






October-1907 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3543 October 1, 1907 - LA CAPELLANIA DEL CONVENTO DE TAMBOBONG v. GUILLERMO ANTONIO, ET AL.

    008 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-3587 October 2, 1907 - FRANCISCO ALDAMIS v. FAUSTINO LEUTERIO

    008 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. L-2827 October 3, 1907 - MARIA LOPEZ Y VILLANUEVA v. TAN TIOCO

    008 Phil 693

  • G.R. No. L-3409 October 3, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. REMIGIO BUSTAMANTE, ET AL.

    008 Phil 698

  • G.R. No. L-3515 October 3, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ANDERSON MACK

    008 Phil 701

  • G.R. No. L-3520 October 3, 1907 - HIJOS DE I. DE LA RAMA v. JOSE ROBLES, ET AL.

    008 Phil 712

  • G.R. No. L-3571 October 3, 1907 - VALENTIN LACUESTA, ET AL. v. PATERNO GUERRERO, ET AL.

    008 Phil 719

  • G.R. No. L-3957 October 3, 1907 - DOMINGO REYES, ET AL. v. SOR EFIGENIA ALVAREZ

    008 Phil 723

  • G.R. No. L-3716 October 4, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. BIBIANO BORJA

    008 Phil 726

  • G.R. No. L-3729 October 4, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ZACARIAS VALENCIA

    008 Phil 729

  • G.R. No. L-3744 October 5, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. CARLOS CASTAÑARES

    008 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. 3067 October 7, 1907 - RUBERT & GUAMIS v. LUENGO & MARTINEZ, ET AL.

    008 Phil 732

  • G.R. No. L-3642 October 7, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO XAVIER

    008 Phil 733

  • G.R. No. L-2558 October 8, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. JULIAN MACALALAD

    009 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-4052 October 8, 1907 - ENRIQUE F. SOMES v. HON. A. S. CROSSFIELD, ET AL.

    008 Phil 284

  • G.R. No. L-3715 October 8, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. BIBIANO BORJA

    009 Phil 8

  • G.R. No. L-3749 October 8, 1907 - ARTADY & CO. v. CLARO SANCHEZ

    009 Phil 10

  • G.R. No. L-3807 October 8, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. SANTIAGO CABIGAO

    009 Phil 12

  • G.R. No. L-4052 October 8, 1907 - ENRIQUE F. SOMES v. HON. A. S. CROSSFIELD

    009 Phil 13

  • G.R. No. L-3752 October 9, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. FAUSTO BASILIO

    009 Phil 16

  • G.R. No. L-4057 October 9, 1907 - MARIANO MACATANGAY v. MUN. OF SAN JUAN DE BOCBOC

    009 Phil 19

  • G.R. No. L-3181 October 10, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. GUMERSINDO DE LA SANTA

    009 Phil 22

  • G.R. No. L-3438 October 12, 1907 - MANUEL LOPEZ Y VILLANUEVA v. EVARISTO ALVAREZ Y PEREZ

    009 Phil 28

  • G.R. No. L-3594 October 12, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ALLEN A. GARNER

    009 Phil 38

  • G.R. No. L-3609 October 12, 1907 - EULALIA ESPINO v. DANIEL ESPINO

    009 Phil 41

  • G.R. No. L-3660 October 12, 1907 - JOSE TAN SUNCO v. ALEJANDRO SANTOS

    009 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. L-3887 October 12, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO FLORES

    009 Phil 47

  • G.R. No. L-3961 October 12, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ISIDORO BASE

    009 Phil 48

  • G.R. No. L-3224 October 17, 1907 - MUÑOZ & CO. v. STRUCKMANN & CO., ET AL.

    009 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-3796 October 17, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. MACARIA RAMIREZ

    009 Phil 67

  • G.R. No. L-3905 October 17, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. REMIGIO DONATO

    009 Phil 701

  • G.R. No. 3810 October 18, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. DAMIAN ORERA

    011 Phil 596

  • G.R. No. L-2870 October 18, 1907 - CITY OF MANILA v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    009 Phil 71

  • G.R. No. L-3766 October 18, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. PONCIANO LIMCANGCO

    009 Phil 77

  • G.R. No. L-3808 October 18, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. JACINTO VICTORIA

    009 Phil 81

  • G.R. No. L-3873 October 18, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. JUSTO DACUYCUY

    009 Phil 84

  • G.R. No. L-3760 October 19, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. WALTER B. BROWN

    009 Phil 89

  • G.R. No. L-3819 October 19, 1907 - JESUS SANCHEZ MELLADO v. MUNICIPALITY OF TACLOBAN

    009 Phil 92

  • G.R. No. L-3853 October 19, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN VILLANUEVA

    009 Phil 94

  • G.R. No. L-3949 October 19, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. GABINO SORIANO

    009 Phil 98

  • G.R. No. L-3532 October 21, 1907 - TY LACO CIOCO v. ARISTON MURO

    009 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. L-3644 October 21, 1907 - VICENTE QUESADA v. ISABELO ARTACHO

    009 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. L-3694 October 21, 1907 - JULIANA BONCAN v. SMITH

    009 Phil 109

  • G.R. No. L-3649 October 24, 1907 - JOSE GUZMAN v. WILLIAM X

    009 Phil 112

  • G.R. No. L-3761 October 24, 1907 - SALUSTIANO LERMA Y MARTINEZ v. FELISA MAMARIL

    009 Phil 118

  • G.R. No. L-3560 October 26, 1907 - MAGDALENA LEDESMA v. ILDEFONSO DORONILA

    009 Phil 119

  • G.R. No. L-3619 October 26, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. APOLONIO CANAMAN

    009 Phil 121

  • G.R. No. L-3676 October 26, 1907 - PONS Y COMPANIA v. LA COMPANIA MARITIMA

    009 Phil 125

  • G.R. No. L-3695 October 16, 1907 - ALEJANDRA PALANCA v. SMITH

    009 Phil 131

  • G.R. No. L-3745 October 26, 1907 - JUAN AGUSTIN v. BARTOLOME INOCENCIO

    009 Phil 134

  • G.R. No. L-3756 October 28, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. ILDEFONSO RODRIGUEZ

    009 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. L-3633 October 30, 1907 - UNITED STATES v. TEODORA BORJAL

    009 Phil 140