Carbonell vs. Court of Appeals, and Poncio Carbonell vs. Court of Appeals, and Poncio 69 SCRA 99 January 1976 FACS! "n January #7, 19$$, respondent Jose Poncio e%ecuted a private &e&orandu& of sale of 'is parcel of land (it' i&prove&ents situated in San Juan, Ri)al in favor of petitioner Rosario Carbonell ('o *ne( t'at t'e said property (as at t'at ti&e sub+ect to a &ortae in favor of t'e Republic Savins -an* RS-/ for t'e su& of P1,$00.00. Four days later, Poncio, in anot'er private &e&orandu&, bound 'i&self to sell t'e sa&e property for an i&proved price to one &&a 2nfante for t'e su& of P#,3$7.$#, (it' t'e latter still assu&in t'e e%istin &ortae debt in favor of t'e RS- in t'e a&ount of P1,177.45. 'us, in February #, Poncio e%ecuted a for&al reisterable deed of sale in 'er 2nfantes/ favor. So, ('en t'e first buyer Carbonell sa( t'e seller Poncio a fe( days after(ards, brinin t'e for&al deed of sale for t'e latters sinature and t'e balance of t'e areed cas' pay&ent, s'e (as told t'at 'e could no loner proceed (it' for&ali)in t'e contract (it' 'er Carbonell/ because 'e 'ad already for&ali)ed a sales contract in favor of 2nfante.
o protect 'er leal ri'ts as t'e first buyer, Carbonell reistered on February 5, 19$$ (it' t'e Reister of eeds 'er adverse clai& as first buyer entitled to t'e property. 8ean('ile, 2nfante, t'e second buyer, (as able to reister t'e sale in 'er favor only on February 1#, 19$$, so t'at t'e transfer certificate of title issued in 'er na&e carried t'e duly annotated adverse clai& of Carbonell as t'e first buyer. 'e trial court declared t'e clai& of t'e second buyer 2nfante to be superior to t'at of t'e first buyer Carbonell, a decision ('ic' t'e Court of Appeals reversed. pon &otion for reconsideration, 'o(ever, Court of Appeals annulled and and set aside its its first decision decision and affir&ed affir&ed t'e trial court court� s decision. decision. 2SS! :'o 'as t'e superior ri't over t'e sub+ect property; C"R R<2=>! 'e Supre&e Supre&e Court reversed reversed t'e appellate appellate court� s decision and and declared t'e t'e first buyer Carbonell to 'ave t'e superior ri't over t'e sub+ect property, relyin on Article 1$44 of t'e Civil Code. nli*e t'e first and t'ird pararap's of said Article 1$44, ('ic' accord preference to t'e one ('o first ta*es possession in ood fait' of personal or real property, t'e second pararap' directs t'at o(ners'ip of i&&ovable property s'ould be reconi)ed in favor of one ?('o in ood fait' first recorded? 'is ri't. nder t'e first and t'ird pararap's, ood fait' &ust c'aracteri)e t'e prior possession, ('ile under t'e second pararap', ood fait' &ust c'aracteri)e t'e act of anterior reistration. :'en Carbonell bou't t'e lot fro& Poncio on January #7, 19$$, s'e (as t'e only buyer t'ereof and t'e title of Poncio (as still in 'is na&e solely encu&bered by ban* &ortae duly annotated t'ereon. Carbonell (as not a(are @ and s'e could not 'ave been a(are @ of any sale to 2nfante as t'ere (as no suc' sale to 2nfante t'en. ence, Carbonells prior purc'ase of t'e land (as &ade in ood fait' ('ic' did not cease after Poncio told 'er on January 31, 19$$ of 'is second sale of t'e sa&e lot to 2nfante. Carbonell (anted to &eet 2nfante but t'e latter refused so to protect 'er leal ri'ts, Carbonell reistered 'er adverse clai& on February 5, 19$$. nder t'e circu&stances, circu&stances, t'is t'is recordin recordin of Carbonell Carbonell� s adverse clai& clai& s'ould be dee&ed dee&ed to 'ave been done in ood fait' and s'ould e&p'asi)e 2nfantes bad fait' ('en t'e
latter reistered 'er deed of sale 4 days later.