Scribd
Upload
240 views2 pages

Melencio vs CA: Land Sale Dispute Analysis

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2007 regarding a property dispute. It describes the ownership history of the disputed land and the various transactions involving the property. The main issue was whether certification and verification by only one plaintiff was valid. The Court held that commonality of interest allows relaxation of the rules, and certification against forum shopping should be interpreted liberally to serve the ends of justice. Substantial compliance with the contents of the certification is sufficient.

Uploaded by

Samantha Li
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
240 views2 pages

Melencio vs CA: Land Sale Dispute Analysis

The document summarizes a Supreme Court case from 2007 regarding a property dispute. It describes the ownership history of the disputed land and the various transactions involving the property. The main issue was whether certification and verification by only one plaintiff was valid. The Court held that commonality of interest allows relaxation of the rules, and certification against forum shopping should be interpreted liberally to serve the ends of justice. Substantial compliance with the contents of the certification is sufficient.

Uploaded by

Samantha Li
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
  • Case Analysis: Melencio vs CA

22.

Melencio vs CA, GR 148846, Sept 25, 2007

FACTS: The subject property is a 30,351 square meter parcel of land particularly denominated as Lot No. 3368, located
at Suba-basbas, Marigondon, Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu, and part of total area of 30,777 square meters covered by TCT
No. 20626 in the name of the late petitioner Go Kim Chuan. The entire property was originally owned by Esteban
Bonghanoy who had only one child, Juana Bonghanoy-Amodia, mother of the late Leoncia Amodia and petitioners
Amodias. The entire property was brought under the operation of the Torrens System. However, the title thereto was
lost during the Second World War. On July 10, 1964, the Amodias allegedly executed an Extra-Judicial Partition of Real
Estate with Deed of Absolute Sale whereby they extra-judicially settled the estate of Esteban Bonghanoy and conveyed
the subject property to respondent Aznar Brothers Realty Company for a consideration of P10,200.00. On August 10,
1964, the said Extra-Judicial Partition of Real Estate with Deed of Absolute Sale was registered under Act 3344 as
there was no title on file at the Register of Deeds of Lapiu-Lapu City. Thereafter, AZNAR made some improvements
and constructed a beach house theron. On February 18, 1989, petitioners executed a Deed of Extra-Judicial Settlement
with Absolute Sale, conveying the subject property in favor of Go Kim Chuan for and in consideration of P70,000.00.
Aznar then filed a case against petitioners Amodias and Go Kim Chuan for Annulment of Sale and Cancellation of TCT
No. 20626 alleging that the sale to Go Kim Chuan was an invalid second sale.

ISSUE: WON there is a valid certification and verification by only one of the plaintiffs?

HELD: Yes, the Court reiterated the ruling in the case of Iglesia ni Cristo, 505 SCRA 828, that Commonality of interest
is material and crucial to relaxation of the Rules. The Rules may be reasonably and liberally construed to avoid a patent
denial of substantial justice, because it cannot be denied, that the ends of justice are better served when cases are
determined on the merits- after all parties are given full opportunity to ventile their causes and defenses – rather than
on technicality or some procedural imperfections. The same liberality should likewise be applied to the certification
against forum shopping. The general rule is that the certification must be signed by all plaintiffs in a case and the
signature of only one of them is insufficient. However, the Court has also stressed in a number of cases that the rules
on forum shopping were designed to promote and facilitate the orderly administration of justice and thus should not be
interpreted with such absolute literalness as to subvert its own ultimate and legitimate objective. The rule of substantial
compliance may be availed of with respect to the contents of the certification. This is because the requirement of strict
compliance with the provisions merely underscored its mandatory nature in that the certification cannot be altogether
dispensed with or its requirements completely disregarded.

You might also like