LUNA, ET AL. VS. MONS. SANTOS, ET AL., PETITIONERS AND APPELLEES VS. MONS. PEDRO P. SANTOS, ET. AL., RESPONDENTS AND APPELLANTS

This is an appeal taken by respondents from a decision rendered by
the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon on August 31,1955 dismissing
the petition as well as the counterclaim interposed by respondents. The
appeal was taken directly to the Court of Appeals, but as petitioners
also appealed from the decision directly to this Court because they
impugned the jurisdiction of the court a quo, the appeal was forwarded to this Court in a resolution entered on January 4, 1956 (G. R. No. L-10457).

Petitioners’ appeal was docketed as G. R. No. L-9914, and the same
was decided by this Court on December 19, 1957. In ruling on the issue
raised by petitioners, we said that the court a quo, as a
court of general jurisdiction, had authority to pass upon the validity
of the document in controversy and so it found no reason to reverse its
ruling that the act ef the register of deeds in cancelling O.C.T. No.
O-32 and issuing T.C.T. Nos. 656 and 657 is proper.

The facts of this case, as found by this Court in G. R. No. L-9914 (102 Phil., 588) are as follows:

“Rev. Fr. Martin S. Alcazar was the original owner
of 2 parcels of land: one located at Bariis, Pilar, Sorsogon,
containing an area of 34,8471 hectares, and the other at Burabon,
Loreto, Castilla, of the same province, with an area of 440.3326
hectares (Exh. 1). In an absolute deed of sale dated February 17, 1948,
Fr. Alcazar appeared to have sold the aforementioned parcels of land
together with a house of strong materials erected on the land of Frank
Hoelzl at Putiao, Pilar, Sorsogon, to the Roman Catholic Bishop pf
Nueva Caceres in consideration of the sum of P12,000.00. It was
specifically provided for in said instrument that as the said parcels
of land were not yet brought under the Torrens system, although at the
time of the transaction the proceeding for the registration of the same
was still pending (GLRO No. 2, Rec. No. N-728), the deed of sale should
be registered under Act 3344. On July 4,1953, Original Certificate of
Title No. O-32 covering the parcels of land abovementioned was actually
issued in the name of Fr. Martin S. Alcazar. It does not appear from
the record that the deed of sale (Exh. 1) was ever registered under the
provisions of Act 3344 as agreed upon.

“On January 17, 1954,
after the demise of Fr. Martin Alcazar, the deed of sale (Exh. 1) was
presented to the Register of Deeds of Sorsogon for registration,
together with an instrument executed by Monsignor Pedro P. Santos
ceding all the property rights and interests that he had as the Roman
Catholic Archbishop of Nueva Caceres over the properties subject of the
sale in favor of the Roman “Catholic Bishop of Legaspi, with Mons.
Flaviano B. Ariola as incumbent (Exh. D). As a consequence thereof,
O.C.T. No. O-32 was cancelled and Transfer, Certificate of Title No.
656 was issued to Mons. Pedro P, Santos, but said certificate was
likewise cancelled on the same day and Transfer Certificate of Title
No. 657 was issued in the name of Mons. Flaviano B. Ariola in virtue of
the cession of rights executed by Mons. Santos in favor of the Roman
Catholic Bishop of Legaspi.

“On April 20, 1954, Concepcion H.
Luna, Alfredo Hoelzl, Carmen A. Hoelzl, Elizabeth A. Hoelzl, Ignacio A.
Luna, Juan Alcazar, Reynaldo Alcazar, Gloria Amparo Huab, Francisca H.
Javier, Angela A. Buencamino, Lourdes, Alcazar Dellosa, Irineo Dellosa,
Ruperto Alcazar, Jr. Jose Alcazar, Rigoberto Alcazar, Purita Alcazar,
Thelma Alcazar, Lorencita A. de Vera and Delfin de Vera, nephews and
nieces and alleged heirs of the late Fr. Martin Alcazar filed a
petition with the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon, which was
docketed as Special Action No. 879, contending that the cancellation of
O.C.T. No. O-32 and the subsequent issuance of T.C.T. Nos. 656 and 657
were illegal because the alleged right of Mons. Pedro P. Santos was
deemed abandoned upon the issuance of the original certificate of title
in the name of Fr. Alcazar without the said deed of sale being
annotated therein, and consequently, the transfer of said right in
favor of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Legaspi was equally null and
void. Thus they prayed the Court to order Mons. Flaviano B, Ariola to
surrender T.C.T. No. 657 to the Register of Deeds of Sor-sogon; to
order said Register of Deeds to cancel the same and issue a new
certificate of title in substitution of the Original Certificate of
Title No. O-32 in the name of the late Fr. Alcazar, and for. such other
relief as may be deemed proper in the premiss.”

This decision will be confined to the appeal taken by respondents docketed as G. R. No. L-10457.

On this point, respondents contend that the trial court erred in
holding that “en cuanto a las reconvensiones de los recurridos, no se
ha presentado prueba alguna de la mala fe o de deseos mal intencionados
de los recurrentes al entablar esta accion, aparte de que el Juzgado
es de opinion que estos procedimientos no habian adquirido publicidad
de tal manera que pueda crear un descredito e verguenza de parte de los
recurridos.”

We note that respondent Mons. Pedro P. Santos set up in his answer a
counterclaim in the amount of P1,000.00 as actual damages and
attorney’s fees and the sum of P10,000.00 as moral damages, whereas
respondent Mons. Flaviano B. Ariola set up a counterclaim in the amount
of P100,000.00 as moral damages considering that he is a bishop of the
Roman Catholic church and as already stated, the court a quo denied
both counterclaims on the ground that petitioners acted in good faith
in filing the present petition.

Considering that petitioners are the nephews and nieces of the late
Fr. Martin Alcazar who was the real owner of the two parcels of land
which were allegedly sold to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Nueva Caceres
in consideration of the sum of P12,000.00 the annulment of which was
sought by them in the petition, and it appearing that they filed said
petition in the honest belief that the transfer was not really effected
in the sense that the real consideration of the sale was not paid
because, as found by the court a quo, of said consideration only the
sum of P2,200.00 was paid, the balance having been left in the care of
Mons. Santos so that it may be added to the original fund of P50,000.00
which the late friar Alcazar entrusted to him for the purpose of
establishing a mission house in the diocese of Nueva Caceres, we are of
the opinion that there is no sufficient basis for holding them
responsible for (the) moral damages as found by the trial court. This
is also the same conclusion we reached in G. R. No. L-9914.

Wherefore, the decision of the court a quo, insofar as the appeal of respondents is concerned, is affirmed, without costs.

Padilla, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, and Dizon, JJ. concur.