28/07/2026
The (SC) has ruled that a sale of land remains valid even if the deed of sale designates a different lot number from what was actually sold, as long as the partiesโ true agreement can be clearly shown. The deed may then be corrected to match what the parties actually agreed to.
In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SCโs Third Division upheld the sale of a 491-square-meter parcel of land in Cebu City between buyers Genara and Felipe Abay, Sr. (the Abays) and sellers Crispin Caballes and the heirs of Trinidad Caballes-Gallardo (the Gallardos), despite the mistake in the designation of the lot number in the deed of sale.
The property formed part of the estate of Margarita Lopez, who had nine children, including Crispin and Trinidad.
The Abays visited the site with Crispin and Tomas Gallardo, one of Trinidadโs heirs before buying the property. During the visit, they were showed them the landโs boundaries. Tomas even helped the Abays build a concrete fence around it.
The Abays openly occupied the property for about 20 years until their possession was disrupted when workers of spouses Jacinto and Chiok Ngo Lim Young (the Youngs), who are claiming ownership over the property, entered it, destroyed the fence, and built their own posts.
The Abays discovered that a title over the property had been issued in the Youngsโ name. This prompted them to file a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to cancel the title.
The Gallardos challenged this, arguing that the documents the Abays presented referred to a different lot, Lot No. 6036-B, and not the lot they were occupying, which was Lot No. 7. While both lots were located in the same area, they were separate properties and were not beside each other. The Youngs supported the Gallardosโ position and maintained that they were buyers in good faith.
The RTC ruled in favor of the Abays which ruling was reversed by the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA held that the documents presented by the Abays showed that they purchased Lot No. 6036-B and not Lot No. 7, which they claimed to own and possess.
The SC disagreed and reiterated its pronouncements in previous cases upholding the validity of the sale and allowing the correction of a contract to reflect the partiesโ true agreement in instances where the deed of sale failed to accurately describe the land intended by the parties.
The SC stressed that a person buys property based on what they see on the ground, such as its boundaries, landmarks, and improvements, and not by its technical lot number. Ordinary buyers cannot be expected to identify property based only on survey descriptions or legal documents.
Under the ๐๐ช๐ท๐ช๐ญ ๐๐ฐ๐ฅ๐ฆ, a written document may be corrected when, because of a mistake, it does not express the partiesโ actual agreement.
The SC explained that a contract may be reformed or corrected if: (1) the parties agreed on the transaction; (2) the written document does not express their true agreement; and (3) the error was caused by a mistake, fraud, accident, or unfair conduct.
In this case, all these requirements were present.
Thus, the Court declared deemed reformed the Deeds of Sale and Extrajudicial Settlement and Sale by changing the designation of the property sold from โLot No. 6036-Bโ to โLot 7โ and the Abays as absolute owners of such property.
Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=169523
Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/266298-spouses-genera-and.../
Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIOโs Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution
The (SC) has ruled that a sale of land remains valid even if the deed of sale designates a different lot number from what was actually sold, as long as the partiesโ true agreement can be clearly shown. The deed may then be corrected to match what the parties actually agreed to.
In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SCโs Third Division upheld the sale of a 491-square-meter parcel of land in Cebu City between buyers Genara and Felipe Abay, Sr. (the Abays) and sellers Crispin Caballes and the heirs of Trinidad Caballes-Gallardo (the Gallardos), despite the mistake in the designation of the lot number in the deed of sale.
The property formed part of the estate of Margarita Lopez, who had nine children, including Crispin and Trinidad.
The Abays visited the site with Crispin and Tomas Gallardo, one of Trinidadโs heirs before buying the property. During the visit, they were showed them the landโs boundaries. Tomas even helped the Abays build a concrete fence around it.
The Abays openly occupied the property for about 20 years until their possession was disrupted when workers of spouses Jacinto and Chiok Ngo Lim Young (the Youngs), who are claiming ownership over the property, entered it, destroyed the fence, and built their own posts.
The Abays discovered that a title over the property had been issued in the Youngsโ name. This prompted them to file a complaint before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to cancel the title.
The Gallardos challenged this, arguing that the documents the Abays presented referred to a different lot, Lot No. 6036-B, and not the lot they were occupying, which was Lot No. 7. While both lots were located in the same area, they were separate properties and were not beside each other. The Youngs supported the Gallardosโ position and maintained that they were buyers in good faith.
The RTC ruled in favor of the Abays which ruling was reversed by the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA held that the documents presented by the Abays showed that they purchased Lot No. 6036-B and not Lot No. 7, which they claimed to own and possess.
The SC disagreed and reiterated its pronouncements in previous cases upholding the validity of the sale and allowing the correction of a contract to reflect the partiesโ true agreement in instances where the deed of sale failed to accurately describe the land intended by the parties.
The SC stressed that a person buys property based on what they see on the ground, such as its boundaries, landmarks, and improvements, and not by its technical lot number. Ordinary buyers cannot be expected to identify property based only on survey descriptions or legal documents.
Under the ๐๐ช๐ท๐ช๐ญ ๐๐ฐ๐ฅ๐ฆ, a written document may be corrected when, because of a mistake, it does not express the partiesโ actual agreement.
The SC explained that a contract may be reformed or corrected if: (1) the parties agreed on the transaction; (2) the written document does not express their true agreement; and (3) the error was caused by a mistake, fraud, accident, or unfair conduct.
In this case, all these requirements were present.
Thus, the Court declared deemed reformed the Deeds of Sale and Extrajudicial Settlement and Sale by changing the designation of the property sold from โLot No. 6036-Bโ to โLot 7โ and the Abays as absolute owners of such property.
Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=169523
Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/266298-spouses-genera-and-felipe-abay-sr-et-al-vs-spouses-jacinto-s-young-et-al/
Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIOโs Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution
