Garcia vs Orozco

Facts:

The case involves a dispute over the ownership of certain lots of land.

Prior to the partition of the conjugal properties, the widow, Albina Garcia, sold the disputed lots to her
sister, Baldomera Garcia.

In the intestate proceedings, the court denied Baldomera Garcia's motion for intervention and
adjudicated other lots to Albina Garcia.

The court later placed the decedent's acknowledged natural children in possession of the disputed lots
through a writ of execution.

The widow's brother, Juan Garcia, then wrested the disputed lots from the children and remained in
possession as the widow's "encargado" until 1942.

In 1942, the children filed an action for recovery of possession and ownership.

The court adjudged the children as owners of the disputed lots, but the records were destroyed during
the war before the appeal could be filed.

A trial de novo was ordered, and the plaintiffs were allowed to file an amended complaint updating the
amount of damages originally prayed for.

After trial, the court ordered the defendants to vacate the lots, and the appellate court affirmed the
judgment.

ISSUE

1) whether the sale of the disputed lots was valid.

2) whether the defendants acquired ownership through prescription.

RULING

1) The court committed no error in ruling that "(s)uch being the case, and inasmuch as the plaintiffs-
appellees are the natural children of the late Epifanio Orozco, the lower court correctly held that they
are entitled to the parcels of land in questions the ownership of which had been adjudicated in his
Epifanios favor as early as in 1932.

2) As found by the appellate court, "the land in Malobago, Guinobatan, with an area of 261,035 square
meters originally formed an integral part of a big parcel of land owned and possessed by Epifanio Orozco
since the Spanish regime. The land in Malobago was subdivided into Lots 7207, 7213 and 7217 of the
Cadastral Survey of Guinobatan In effect, the Court of Appeals rejected the theory of Juan Garcia that he
bought the Malobago property from Epifanio Orozco and Angel Conejero This finding of fact is final and
conclusive upon this Court and may not be reviewed or revised by Us in the present appeal by certiorari.
The claim of Juan Garcia that he has acquired the Malobago properties through proportion is, therefore,
clearly without factual or legal basis.

Moreover when Juan Garcia wrested position of the Malobago properties in January 1933 and was cited
for contempt by the court in Civil Case No. 5127, he was aware that the court had adjudicated
ownership of the lands to the Orozco heirs and consequently he cannot thereafter c on of the land in the
concept of owner as then and there the flaw in his title was apparent and patent. Even as he continued
in possession of the land thereafter as encargado" of Albina Garcia as hereinbefore stated, from 1933 to
the action of the instant case on December 18, 1942, his on could not ripen to ownership through
acquisitive proportion, considering that the period when the courts in Albay were closed from December
12, 1941 to August 10, 1942 and that the ten-year period to file the case had not prescribed. We cannot
sanction petitioners participation of respondents possession, such ouster being committed in bad faith
and in flagrant defiance of the writ of execution issued by the court.