Villareal, J.
FACTS:
·
Gabino Barreto Po Ejap was the owner, with a Torrens
title, of a piece of land in Tacloban. This realty was subject to a mortgage
lien in favor of the Philippine National Bank.
·
In 1921, Gabino's brother, Po Tecsi, executed
a general power of attorney in favor of Gabino, empowering and authorizing him
to perform on his behalf and as lawful agent, among other acts, the following:
"To buy, sell or barter, assign or admit in acquittance, or in any other
manner to acquire or convey all sorts of property, real and personal,
businesses and industries, credits, rights and action belonging to me, for
whatever prices and under the conditions which he may stipulate, paying and
receiving payment in cash or in installments, and to execute the proper
instruments with the formalities provided by the law."
·
In March 1923, Gabino executed a second
mortgage on the aforesaid land with its improvements, in favor of Antonio M. H.
Limjenco, which was subsequently cancelled. In April 1923, Gabino sold the same piece of land with its improvements
to his brother Po Tecsi for P10,000. Then in December 1923, making use of the
general power of attorney conferred on him by his brother Po Tecsi, Gabino sold
absolutely and forever to Jose M. Katigbak the same piece of land.
·
Ever since the property had been sold by
Gabino to Katigbak, the former had administrated it, entering into an oral
contract of lease with Po Tecsi, who occupied it at a monthly rental of P1,500,
payable in advance on the first day of each month. Po Tecsin then sub-leased
the property to Tai Hing Co. and to Po Sun Suy and Po Ching. Later on, when Po
Tecsi died, Po Sun Suy, as administrator of the estate of his father Po Tecsi,
continued renting said land. It should be noted that both Po Tecsi (when he was
still alive) and his son Po Son Suy (the administrator of Po Tecsi's estate)
failed to remit the rental payments to Gabino.
·
Subsequently, Katigbak transferred the
ownership of the land to Po Sun Boo, who demanded the payment of the
outstanding rental payments amounting to P45,280.
·
During the trial, Po Son Suy argued that the
power of attorney conferred by his late father, Po Tecsin, to Gabino did not
give the latter the authority to sell the subject land to Katigbak. This was
because the power of attorney was executed BEFORE Gabino had sold the subject
land to Po Tecsin. This meant that Po Tecsin was not yet the owner of the
property at the time of the execution of the power of attorney in favor of
Gabino. As such, the consequent sale of the same land to Po Tecsin was beyond
the scope of the power of attorney.
·
CFI of Manila ruling: Sale of the land
belonging to Po Tecsin in favor of Katigbak, effected through the power of
attorney conferred by the former to his brother Gabino, is valid. Estate of Po
Tecsi is ordered to pay sub-lessees Po Son Suy and Po Ching the sum which
represents the rents of the property unduly collected from them by Po Tecsi
while alive and by his administrator Po Sun Suy. Po Son Suy and Po Ching are
then ordered to pay rental payments to Katigbak..
RULING:
Whether
Gabino is authorized to sell Po Tecsin's land by virtue of the power of
attorney conferred by the latter to the former, even though at the time of th
·
The power of attorney conferred by Po Tecsin
to Gabino is general. It authorizes Gabino to sell any kind of realty
"belonging" (pertenezcan) to the principal. The use of the
subjunctive "pertenezcan" (might belong) and not the indicative
"pertenecen" (belong), means that Po Tecsi meant not only the
property he had at the time of the execution of the power, but also such as he
might afterwards have during the time it was in force.
·
The fact that the said power of attorney was
not recorded in the registry of deeds does not invalidate the sale either.
While it is true that a power of attorney not recorded in the registry of deeds
is ineffective in order than an agent or attorney-in-fact may validly perform
acts in the name of his principal, and that any act performed by the agent by
virtue of said power with respect to the land is ineffective against a third
person who, in good faith, may have acquired a right thereto, it does, however,
bind the principal to acknowledge the acts performed by his attorney-in-fact
regarding said property .
·
Given the foregoing, the sale made on November
22, 1923 by Gabino, as attorney-in-fact of Po Tecsi, in favor of Jose M.
Katigbak of the land in question, is valid. As such, Katigbak is the absolute
owner of the property in question and he has the right to demand (and in fact
he should be paid) the rental payments due and unpaid.