Constitutum Possessorium Agreement Is To Be: Camarin

BAUTISTA v.
SIOSON
Both transactions were recorded in notarial
Torres, J. / 1919 instruments.
On September 4, 1912, the defendant Francisco Sioson and To determine who is the lawful owner of the camarin
his wife Lorenza de la Cruz, through a notarial instrument, sold sold, if the provisions of said article of the Code are to be
to the plaintiff Rosalio Bautista the camarin in question, observed, we have to:
besides some other property, under the right of repurchase. It 1. determine the contention in regard to which of
was stipulated that if within two years from the date of the the two purchasers is in possession
contract the vendors or their successors in interest should not 2. If, on the execution of the contract of lease by the
repurchase said properties for the sum of P400, the price of first purchaser in favor of the vendor himself, the
the sale, such sale should become absolute and thenceforth constitutum possessorium agreement is to be
the ownership in the properties sold should be consolidated, considered to have been stipulated, the
the execution of another instrument being unnecessary. conclusion must necessarily be reached as to
which of the two purchasers first took
On the same date, September 4, 1912, Rosalio Bautista, possession of the camarin sold; and,
through a notarial instrument, leased the properties sold to him 3. whether the material possession of the tenant is
to the vendors Francisco Sioson and Lorenza de la Cruz, for of a precarious nature, enjoyed in the same and
the price of P100 per annum, for the period of two years representation of the owner Bautista.
counted from the date of the instrument.
August 5, 1914, Francisco Sioson executed before a notary a Article 1462 of the Civil Code reads:
document by which he sold under right of repurchase to the
defendant Raymundo de la Cruz, the camarin in question. It
was stipulated in this instrument that if within six months, A thing sold shall be considered as delivered, when it
counted from the 1st of August, 1914, the vendor Francisco is placed in the hands and possession of the vendee.
Sioson should return to the purchase Raymundo de la Cruz the
sum of P422, the price of the purchase, then the purchaser When the sale should be made by means of a public
Raymundo de la Cruz would be obliged to execute in favor of instrument, the execution thereof shall be equivalent
said vendor Francisco Sioson an instrument of resale, but that to the delivery of the thing which is the object of the
if within the period mentioned he should not make the contract, if in said instrument the contrary does not
redemption stipulated, said sale should become absolute, the appear or may be clearly inferred.
execution of another instrument being unnecessary.
In the contract of lease, it showed that the camarin would be
Plaintiff prayed for the court to hold that his ownership in said continued to be occupied by its previous owner and vendor
buildings was consolidated, to order the defendants to deliver after it had been delivered, symbolically, by means of the
him the buildings, and to order Francisco Sioson to pay to the instrument executed for the purpose in favor of the purchaser,
him the price of the lease. in order that he might hold it in the capacity of lessee, it being
supposed, by a legal fiction, that the purchaser entered into
Defendants alleged that the camarin described in possession of the camarin sold, a form of possession utilized
subparagraph (a) , paragraph 2 of the complaint, was of the by the purchaser by virtue of the clause known in law as
exclusive ownership of the defendant Raymundo de la Cruz. constitutum possessorium, stipulated between the contracting
parties.
ISSUE: Which of the two purchasers, the plaintiff Bautista and
the defendant Cruz, is the lawful owner of the camarin
successively sold to the former and to the latter by the other Rosalio Bautista was the first possessor of the camarin by
defendant Francisco Sioson, its original owner, in accordance virtue of the sale between him and Sioson. He entered into the
with the provisions contained in article 1473 of the Civil Code material possession under title of owner, of the camarin sold to
which says that: him by Francisco Sioson, and, by virtue of another instrument
Should there be no entry; the property shall belong to of lease, of the same date, the purchaser and owner of the
the person who first took possession of its in good camarin conveyed and delivered this building to the lessee in
faith . . . view of said contract.
HELD: Bautista is the rightful owner of the camarin. Material possession being enjoyed by Cruz was subsequent by
almost two years. It was an unlawful possession which was
The deed of sale between Bautista and Sioson was transmitted to him by Francisco Sioson, who held the camarin
not entered in the registry of property. Upon the execution of precariously and in the capacity of tenant. Sioson was without
the second sale of the same camarin by the said Sioson, which any right whatever to convey to Raymundo de la Cruz the
sale was made after the death of his wife Lorenza by virtue of possession under title of owner referred to in article 1473,
an instrument made in favor of Cruz, it may be presumed, in aforementioned of the Civil Code.
the absence of proof to the contrary, that the second purchaser
Raymundo de la Cruz acted in good faith. However, actual and
HANA R. 
material possession of the camarin by Cruz does not constitute
a sufficient legal reason for holding the he has a better right to
the building than the first purchaser Rosalio Bautista, although
the latter was not in actual, physical, and material of the
camarin that he had purchased. This conclusion is derived
from a strict application of the provisions of said article 1473 of
the Civil Code.

Constitutum Possessorium Agreement Is To Be: Camarin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Constitutum Possessorium Agreement Is To Be: Camarin

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Constitutum Possessorium Agreement Is To Be: Camarin

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAUTISTA v.

You might also like