G.R. No. 138774 ; March 8, 2001
REGINA FRANCISCO AND ZENAIDA PASCUAL, petitioners, vs. AIDA FRANCISCO-ALFONSO, respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Aida Francisco-Alfonso is the sole legitimate daughter of the late Gregorio Francisco. Petitioners Regina Francisco and Zenaida Pascual are Gregorio’s illegitimate children. Gregorio owned two parcels of land. After his death, Aida discovered that a “Kasulatan sa Ganap na Bilihan” (Deed of Absolute Sale) dated August 15, 1983, had been executed, transferring the said properties to the petitioners for P25,000.00. New titles were subsequently issued in their names.
Aida filed a complaint for annulment of the sale, alleging forgery of her father’s signature. The Regional Trial Court dismissed her complaint, upholding the validity of the deed. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the trial court, declaring the deed null and void, annulling the petitioners’ titles, and ordering the reinstatement of Gregorio’s original certificates of title. The appellate court found the contract to be simulated and without consideration. Petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a petition for review on certiorari.

ISSUE

May a legitimate daughter be deprived of her share in the estate of her deceased father by a simulated contract transferring the property to his illegitimate children?

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that its jurisdiction in a Rule 45 petition is limited to reviewing errors of law, and the factual findings of the Court of Appeals, being supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive. The Court found no reason to deviate from these findings.
The legal logic is clear: the contract of sale was simulated. The evidence established the absence of a true consideration. The testimonies of the petitioners regarding their financial capacity to purchase the property in 1983 were deemed incredible and inconsistent. The Court found it unbelievable that their alleged meager incomes from selling goods or working as a cashier could have generated sufficient savings to pay P25,000.00 in cash. A simulated or fictitious contract is void from the beginning under Article 1409(2) of the Civil Code.
Furthermore, the property forms part of Gregorio’s estate. Under Article 888 of the Civil Code, the legitime of legitimate children is reserved; they cannot be deprived of their hereditary share except through a valid disinheritance under the law. The simulated sale was a transparent attempt to circumvent this legal reserve, effectively disinheriting the sole legitimate heir without cause. Therefore, the contract is void, and the legitimate daughter cannot be deprived of her rightful share through such a scheme.