Scribd
Upload
129 views2 pages

204 - Avila v. CA

The petitioners, heirs of Marciana G. Avila, sought review of a Court of Appeals decision regarding property purchased by Avila at a public auction. Avila was a public school teacher, and as such was prohibited under Section 579 of the Revised Administrative Code from purchasing property sold by the government for non-payment of taxes. The Court of Appeals affirmed this prohibition and declared the sale to Avila void. While Avila paid for the property and was issued a final bill of sale, as a government employee she was banned from such purchases. Being party to an illegal contract, neither Avila nor her heirs could recover what was given or request fulfillment of promises related to the void sale.

Uploaded by

Bea Charisse Maravilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
129 views2 pages

204 - Avila v. CA

The petitioners, heirs of Marciana G. Avila, sought review of a Court of Appeals decision regarding property purchased by Avila at a public auction. Avila was a public school teacher, and as such was prohibited under Section 579 of the Revised Administrative Code from purchasing property sold by the government for non-payment of taxes. The Court of Appeals affirmed this prohibition and declared the sale to Avila void. While Avila paid for the property and was issued a final bill of sale, as a government employee she was banned from such purchases. Being party to an illegal contract, neither Avila nor her heirs could recover what was given or request fulfillment of promises related to the void sale.

Uploaded by

Bea Charisse Maravilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

HEIRS OF MARCIANA G. AVILA, petitioners, vs. HON.

COURT OF APPEALS, and


ALADINO CH. BACARRISAS, respondents.
G.R. No. L-45255 November 14, 1986
PARAS, J. SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION

NATURE OF THE ACTION: Petition for Review on Certiorari

FACTS:
The CFI, as a cadastral court, adjudicated the subject lots to Paz Chavez. Since Chavez failed to
pay the property taxes, the government offered the same for sale at a public auction. Avila,
participated and won in the bidding. Despite the provision of Section 579 of the Revised
Administrative Code prohibiting public school teachers from buying delinquent properties,
nobody, not even the government questioned her participation in said auction sale. After the
expiration of the redemption period, the Provincial Treasurer executed in her favor the final bill
of sale.

The OCTs covering the lots were issued in favor of Paz Chavez. In opposition thereto, the
private respondents filed a petition for review of the decrees at the CFI. The cadastral court set
aside the decision that adjudicated the lots in question in favor Chavez and declared null and
void the decrees and CTs. Chavez appealed the decision with the CA.

The CA modified the decision of the CFI, disallowing the registration of a lot in the name of
Avila. Upon remand of the records to the court below, Avila moved for execution, and a writ of
possession which was opposed by Chavez, who was succeeded by the herein private respondent
Aladino Ch. Bacarrisas on the alleged ground that he has the actual and physical possession of
the subject lot.

Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration but the same was denied by the CA. Hence, this
petition.

ISSUE: Whether or not the purchase of the lot at a public auction by the petitioner, as a public
school teacher, is void.

RULING: Yes, the decision of the CA is affirmed.


While it is true that Marciana Avila, their mother and predecessor-in-interest, purchased the
questioned property at a public auction conducted by the government; paid the purchase price;
and was issued a final bill of sale after the expiration of the redemption period, it is however
undisputed that such purchase was prohibited under Section 579 of the Revised Administrative
Code, as amended, which provides:

Section 579. Inhibition against purchase of property at tax sale.-Official and employees of the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines are prohibited from purchasing, directly or
indirectly, from the Government, any property sold by the Government for the non-payment of
any public tax. Any such purchase by a public official or employee shall be void. Thus, the sale
to her of Lot 594 is void.
On the other hand, under Article 1409 of the Civil Code, a void contract is inexistent from the
beginning. It cannot be ratified neither can the right to set up the defense of its illegality be
waived. (Arsenal, et al. vs, The Intermediate Appellate Court. et al., G.R. No. 66696, July 14,
1986). Moreover, Marciana Avila was a party to an illegal transaction, and therefore, under Art.
1412 of the Civil Code, she cannot recover what she has given by reason of the contract or ask
for the fulfillment of what has been promised her.

You might also like