Scribd
Upload
79 views3 pages

Natcher V CA

This case involves a dispute over land ownership between the second wife of the deceased Graciano del Rosario (petitioner Patricia Natcher) and Graciano's children from his first marriage (private respondents). The private respondents allege that Natcher fraudulently obtained title to the land through a forged deed of sale from Graciano. The RTC ruled the sale was prohibited and null, but could be considered an advance inheritance for Natcher. The CA reversed. The Supreme Court held that the RTC, acting in general jurisdiction, did not have authority to determine issues regarding the settlement of Graciano's estate, like whether the sale constituted an advance to Natcher, as this requires a probate

Uploaded by

Michaella Ramirez
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
79 views3 pages

Natcher V CA

This case involves a dispute over land ownership between the second wife of the deceased Graciano del Rosario (petitioner Patricia Natcher) and Graciano's children from his first marriage (private respondents). The private respondents allege that Natcher fraudulently obtained title to the land through a forged deed of sale from Graciano. The RTC ruled the sale was prohibited and null, but could be considered an advance inheritance for Natcher. The CA reversed. The Supreme Court held that the RTC, acting in general jurisdiction, did not have authority to determine issues regarding the settlement of Graciano's estate, like whether the sale constituted an advance to Natcher, as this requires a probate

Uploaded by

Michaella Ramirez
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/ 3

NATCHER v.

CA

FACTS:

Sps. Graciano del Rosario and Graciana Esguerra were registered


owners of a parcel of land located in Manila. Upon the death of
Graciana in 1951, Graciano, together with his six children, namely:
Bayani, Ricardo, Rafael, Leticia, Emiliana and Nieves, entered into an
extrajudicial settlement of Graciana’s estate. 

On 09 February 1954, said heirs executed and forged an “Agreement


of Consolidation-Subdivision of Real Property with Waiver of Rights”.
Graciano then donated to his children, share and share alike, a portion
of his interest in the land amounting to 4,849.38 square meters leaving
only 447.60 square meters registered under Graciano’s name.

On 20 March 1980, Graciano married herein petitioner Patricia


Natcher. During their marriage, Graciano sold his land to his wife
Patricia. On 07 October 1985,Graciano died leaving his second wife
Patricia and his six children by his first marriage, as heirs.

Private respondents filed a complaint alleged that upon Graciano’s


death, petitioner Natcher, through the employment of fraud,
misrepresentation and forgery, making it appear that Graciano
executed a Deed of Sale dated 25 June 19876 in favor herein petitioner
resulting in the cancellation and the issuance of title in the name of
Patricia Natcher. Similarly, herein private respondents alleged in said
complaint that as a consequence of such fraudulent sale, their
legitimes have been impaired.
RTC ruled that the sale is prohibited by law and thus a complete
nullity. Although the deed of sale cannot be regarded as such or as a
donation, it may however be regarded as an extension of advance
inheritance of Patricia Natcher being a compulsory heir of the
deceased.”

CA reversed and set aside the lower court.

ISSUE:

May a Regional Trial Court, acting as a court of general jurisdiction in


an action for reconveyance annulment of title with damages,
adjudicate matters relating to the settlement of the estate of a deceased
person particularly on questions as to advancement of property made
by the decedent to any of the heirs?

HELD:

No. The Regional Trial Court in the instant case, acting in its general
jurisdiction, is devoid of authority to render an adjudication and
resolve the issue of advancement of the real property in favor of
herein petitioner Natcher, inasmuch as Civil Case No. 471075 for
reconveyance and annulment of title with damages is not, to our
mind, the proper vehicle to thresh out said question. Moreover, under
the present circumstances, the RTC of Manila, Branch 55 was not
properly constituted as a probate court so as to validly pass upon the
question of advancement made by the decedent Graciano Del Rosario
to his wife, herein petitioner Natcher.

An action for reconveyance and annulment of title with damages is a


civil action, whereas matters relating to settlement of the estate of a
deceased person such as advancement of property made by the
decedent, partake of the nature of a special proceeding, which
concomitantly requires the application of specific rules as provided
for in the Rules of Court.

You might also like