Dear Atty. Nico,
I have a dilemma with my recently purchased real property. I received a letter coming from the court that I was being sued for buying the property from a person who was, allegedly, not its owner and that the true owners had already been deceased long before the sale happened between them.
However, I read somewhere from the internet that a buyer in good faith is “one who buys property of another, without notice that some other person has a right to, or interest in, such property and pays full and fair price for the same, at the time of such purchase, or before he has notice of the claim or interest of some other persons in the property.”
Furthermore, I possess a title of the subject land given to me by the seller. Can I use this argument as my defense against their claim?
Thank you in advance for your response.
Laura
Dear Laura,
As a general rule, an “innocent purchaser for value,” with respect to registered land, is not required to go behind the register to determine the condition of the property; he is only charged with notice of the burdens on the property which are noted on the face of the register or certificate of title, as stated under Section 51 of PD 1529 as amended.
However, in the case of Spouses Manalese vs. The Estate of the Late Spouses Ferreras, the Supreme Court explained that such degree of proof of good faith is sufficient only when the following conditions concur:
1) The seller is the registered owner of the land;
2) The seller is in possession thereof; and
3) At the time of the sale, the buyer was not aware of any claim or interest of some other person in the property, or of any defect or restriction in the title of the seller or in his capacity to convey.
Absent one or two of the foregoing conditions, then the law itself puts the buyer on notice and obliges the latter to exercise a higher degree of diligence by scrutinizing the certificate of title and examining all factual circumstances in order to determine the seller’s title and capacity to transfer any interest in the property.
Under such circumstance, it is no longer sufficient for said buyer to merely show that he relied on the face of the title; he must now also show that he exercised reasonable precaution by inquiring beyond the title. Failure to exercise such degree of precaution makes him a buyer in bad faith.
Applying the same in your case, despite the fact that you possess the “title” to the property in issue, it cannot be denied that the sale between your seller and the purported owners happened during the time when the latter had already passed; thus, making such transaction null and void. Therefore, the “sale” of the said property with the seller as well as the registration thereof produces no effect, which makes you a buyer in bad faith for not exercising due diligence.
Atty. Nico Antonio
