PEDRO AGGALUT, COMPLAINANT, VS. MARIANO T. BAGASAO, RESPONDENT.

This is a complaint for gross misconduct filed in 1978 by Pedro Aggalut
against lawyer Mariano T. Bagasao who was admitted to the bar in 1952.

The spouses Apolinario Aggalut and Juliana Lodovico were the owners of
Lot No. 636 located at Barrio Tuao, North District No. 6, Bagabag, Nueva
Ecija, as shown in Original Certificate of Title No. 4564 issued in
1937. The lot, which has an area of 2,357 square meters, was sold in
1938 in a private instrument to Jeremias Dulay who immediately took
possession thereof. Jeremias was succeeded by his son, Jesus.

On October 10, 1972, Juanita (sister of Apolinario) and Pedro, both
surnamed Aggalut, filed a petition in court through lawyer Bagasao, for
the issuance of owners’ duplicates of titles, allegedly destroyed during
the war, one of which was OCT No. 4564 for Lot No. 636. Lawyer Bagasao
did not present Pedro as a witness to testify because his testimony
allegedly would be cumulative. The court granted the petition.

In the meantime, Pedro Aggalut became the caretaker of Bagasao’s cattle
ranch. On August 31, 1976, lawyer Bagasao (provincial assessor), on the
pretext of working for the transfer of the title of Lot No. 636 to
Pedro, required him and his wife to sign a document in English. The
document dated August 31, 1976 turned out to be a “Deed of Confirmation
of Sale with Absolute Quitclaim” in favor of Juanita Gonong, Bagasao’s
wife, to whom Pedro’s parents allegedly sold the land in a private
instrument for P500 “duly paid” to them and Pedro.

Gonong supposedly took possession of the land after she bought it from
Pedro’s parents. The private writing was not quoted in the deed of
confirmation. Pedro said that he gave Bagasao the tax receipt and fifty
pesos for the registration of the deed. He did not state that he gave
the owner’s duplicate of the title.

Pedro denied that he appeared before Municipal Judge Floramante G.
Tupasi who notarized the deed of confirmation. He had not seen the face
of Judge Tupasi. The deed did not name Bagasao as the husband of the
transferee, Juanita Gonong. The deed was registered. The new title
issued to Gonong described her as “married” but her husband’s name was
not specified.

Bagasao and his wife mortgaged Lot 636 and another lot to the Development Bank of the Philippines on February 22, 1977 as security for a loan of P18,000.

What makes the case perplexing or bewildering is that even before that mortgage, or on December 6, 1976
(that was more than three months after the deed of confirmation),
Juanita Gonong executed in favor of Aggalut a “Deed of Reconveyance
& Resale Over Registered Land”. Gonong stated in that deed that the
transfer to her of the land had to be rescinded because of the adverse
claim of Dulay.

The rescission or reconveyance was allegedly in consideration of the
return of the P500 paid by Gonong to Aggalut but, before the return of
that amount, Gonong should “clear” the land of its mortgage obligation
to the DBP.

Fiscal Justino A. R. Vigilia, the investigator, observed that the said
deed of reconveyance was “unknown” to Aggalut and was not delivered to
him. The adverse claim of Dulay, like the DBP mortgage, was annotated
on Gonong’s title on August 16, 1977 or very much later than
Gonong’s deed of reconveyance. Note further that the deed of
reconveyance was disclosed by lawyer Bagasao in his answer to the
complaint dated October 10, 1978 by means of these allegations:

“That even the ownership of the land (Lot 636) which was lawfully
conveyed to the respondent’s wife, had long remained to belong to the
complainant because when adverse claims of ownership were interposed
over the sale in favor of respondent’s wife, there was no other recourse
for respondent’s wife but to rescind the sale by way of reconveyance of
the property to said complainant. Attached hereto and marked as Annex A
is the deed of resale and reconveyance executed almost two years ago at
Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya and in favor of this complainant, and which
document will clearly show the malice and evil motives of said
complainant in filing the charges against the herein respondent.” (sic)

To support his answer, Bagasao presented the affidavits of Bruno
Organista and Saturnino Galapon. Organista averred that he was
requested by Aggalut to look for a buyer of Lot No. 636. Apparently,
the interested buyer was Juanita Gonong. Because the title was still in
the name of Aggalut’s parents, it was arranged that Aggalut would
execute a document of confirmation of sale in favor of Gonong. Galapon
averred that he was the one who prepared the deed of confirmation and
that Aggalut appeared before the municipal judge to acknowledge it.

In Civil Case No. 2585 of the Court of First Instance of Nueva Vizcaya,
Dulay sued the Bagasao spouses for the cancellation of their title to
Lot No. 636. The case was settled amicably between Dulay and the
Bagasao spouses. The settlement was in favor of Dulay. The title of Gonong was cancelled. A new title was issued to Dulay. Aggalut executed a quitclaim of his supposed rights to Lot No. 636.

Aggalut, assisted by Dulay’s counsel, withdrew his herein complaint against Bagasao.
Fiscal Vigilia noted that Aggalut did not come to this Court with
clean hands. He should have known that he had no rights to Lot No. 636.
The logical complainant was Dulay.

Notwithstanding that withdrawal, Bagasao’s obvious maneuvers and
machinations to acquire that lot cannot be tolerated and glossed over
and cannot escape censure.

He is severely reprimanded for his unethical manipulations regarding Lot
No. 636. A copy of this decision should be attached to his file in the
Bar Confidant’s office.

SO ORDERED.

Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro, and Escolin, JJ., concur.

Makasiar, J., (Chairman), respondent should be disbarred for falsification of a public document and taking undue advantage of an ignorant man.