Monday, June 21, 2010

Ladanga v. CA

Facts:

Clemencia Aseneta, a spinster, had a nephew named Bernardo and a niece named Salvacion. She legally adopted Bernardo in 1961. On April 6, 1974, Clemencia signed 9 deeds of sale in favor of Salvacion for various real properties, one being the Paco property which is the subject of this petition, and purportedly sold for P26,000. In May 1975, Bernardo, as guardian of Clemencia, filed a case for reconveyance of the Paco property. Clemencia testified that she had not received a single centavo from Salvacion. The trial court, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, declared the sale void.

Issue:

Whether the sale is void for lack of consideration

Held:

The Ladanga spouses contend that the Appellate Court disregarded the rule on burden of proof. This contention is devoid of merit because Clemencia herself testified that the price of P26,000 was not paid to her. The burden of the evidence shifted to the Ladanga spouses. They were not able to prove the payment of that amount. The sale was fictitious. A contract of sale is void and produces no effect whatsoever where the price, which appears therein as paid, has in fact never been paid by the purchaser to the vendor. It was not shown that Clemencia intended to donate the Paco property to the Ladangas. Her testimony and the notary's testimony destroyed any presumption that the sale was fair and regular and for a true consideration.

No comments:

Post a Comment