View full case

MARIA B. CHING v. JOSEPH C. GOYANKO

FACTS:

Joseph Goyanko and Epifania dela Cruz were married in 1947 and had children together. In 1961, their parents acquired a property in Cebu City, but it was registered under their aunt Sulpicia Ventura's name since their parents were Chinese citizens at that time. On May 1, 1993, Sulpicia sold the property to Joseph Goyanko, who subsequently sold it to his common-law-wife, Maria Ching, on October 12, 1993. Maria Ching obtained Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 138405 for the property. Following Joseph Goyanko's death, his children discovered that the property's ownership had been transferred to Maria Ching. After having their father's signature on the deed of sale verified, they found it to be a forgery. As a result, the children filed a complaint against Maria Ching, seeking to recover the property and have the deed of sale and TCT No. 138405 nullified. They also requested the issuance of a new title in their father's favor. The trial court dismissed the complaint, upholding the validity of the sale and stating that the signature on the deed of sale was genuine, with Maria Ching providing the purchase price. However, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision and declared the deed of sale and TCT No. 138405 null and void. This was because the property, which was acquired during the marriage of Joseph and Epifania, was presumed to be part of the conjugal partnership.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the subject property is part of the conjugal partnership.

  2. Whether the sale of the subject property is valid.

RULING:

  1. The subject property is considered part of the conjugal partnership. Since the property was acquired during the existence of a valid marriage between Joseph Sr. and Epifania, it is presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership. There is no evidence to rebut this presumption.

  2. The sale of the subject property is declared null and void. Even if the property is not considered conjugal, the sale cannot be sustained due to the lack of clear and convincing evidence to support its validity.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Properties acquired during the existence of a valid marriage are presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership, unless there is clear and convincing evidence to prove otherwise.

  • Torrens title is irrevocable and indefeasible, and can only be challenged in a direct proceeding.