De-Belen-Vda-de-Cabalu-vs-Tabu-2(1).pdf - G.R No 188417 MILAGROS DE BELEN VDA DE CABALU MELITON CABALU SPS ANGELA CABALU and RODOLFO TALAVERA and

De-Belen-Vda-de-Cabalu-vs-Tabu-2(1).pdf - G.R No 188417...

This preview shows page 1 - 2 out of 4 pages.

G.R. No. 188417 September 24, 2012 MILAGROS DE BELEN VDA. DE CABALU, MELITON CABALU, SPS. ANGELA CABALU and RODOLFO TALAVERA, and PATRICIO ABUS, Petitioners, vs. SPS. RENATO DOLORES TABU and LAXAMANA, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Tarlac City, Branch II, Respondents. Facts: On December 8, 1941, Faustina died without any children. She left a holographic will, dated July 27, 1939, assigning and distributing her property to her nephews and nieces, however, was not probated. One of the heirs was the father of Domingo Laxamana (Domingo), Benjamin Laxamana, who died in 1960. On March 5, 1975, Domingo allegedly executed a Deed of Sale of Undivided Parcel of Land disposing of his 9,000 square meter share of the land to Laureano Cabalu. 3 On August 1, 1994, to give effect to the holographic will, the forced and legitimate heirs of Faustina executed a Deed of Extra-Judicial Succession with Partition. The said deed imparted 9,000 square meters of the land covered by TCT No. 16776 to Domingo. Thereafter, on December 14, 1995, Domingo sold 4,500 square meters of the 9,000 square meters to his nephew, Eleazar Tabamo. The document was captioned Deed of Sale of a Portion of Land. On May 7, 1996, the remaining 4,500 square meters of Domingo’s share in the partition was registered under his name under TCT No. 281353. 4 On August 4, 1996, Domingo passed away. On October 8, 1996, two months after his death, Domingo purportedly executed a Deed of Absolute Sale of the remaining share of Domingo in favor of respondent Renato Tabu (Tabu). Subsequently, Tabu and his wife, Dolores Laxamana (respondent spouses), subdivided the said lot into two which resulted into TCT Nos. 291338 and 291339. 5 Respondent Dolores Laxamana-Tabu, together with other heirs of Domingo, filed an unlawful detainer action, against the defendants. The heirs claimed that the defendants were merely allowed to occupy the subject lot by their late father, Domingo, but, when asked to vacate the property, they refused to do so. Thereafter, it was ruled in favour of Domingo’s heir and a writ of execution was issued. On February 4, 2002, petitioners filed a case for Declaration of Nullity of Deed of Absolute Sale, Joint Affidavit of Nullity of Transfer Certificate of Title Nos. 291338 and 291339, Quieting of Title, Reconveyance, Application for Restraining Order, Injunction and Damages (Civil Case No. 9290) against respondent spouses.
Image of page 1
Image of page 2

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 4 pages?

  • Fall '18
  • Jane Blair
  • Inheritance, SI prefix, Choice of law

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture