G.R. No. 159585 & G.R. No. 165318; April 22, 2008
AMANDO A. PONTAOE and DR. ALEJANDRO G. PONTAOE, petitioners, vs. TEODORA A. PONTAOE and EDUARDO A. PONTAOE, respondents. (Consolidated Cases)

FACTS

The dispute involves parcels of land originally co-owned by Juan Pontaoe and his nephew, Dr. Alejandro Pontaoe, and another parcel owned by Juan’s second wife, Tomasa Aquino. After Juan’s death, Teodora and Eduardo Pontaoe (children of Juan and Tomasa) claimed ownership through several deeds: a Deed of Conveyance from Juan and Tomasa to Eduardo for Juan’s share, a Deed of Quitclaim from Dr. Alejandro to Eduardo for his share, and a Deed of Absolute Sale from Tomasa to Teodora for her separate property. These transactions led to the issuance of new titles in the names of Eduardo and Teodora. Teodora and Eduardo filed a complaint to quiet title against their brother Amando, who had taken possession, alleging he was casting a cloud on their ownership.
Amando and Dr. Alejandro contested the validity of the deeds, asserting the signatures of Juan, Tomasa, and Dr. Alejandro were forged. They argued the properties should remain in the estate of the deceased, to be co-owned by all heirs. The Regional Trial Court found the signatures on the Deed of Conveyance and Deed of Quitclaim to be forged, declared them void, and ruled the properties should be co-owned by the heirs. However, it upheld the sale from Tomasa to Teodora. The Court of Appeals modified this, upholding the trial court’s finding of forgery for the first two deeds but also reversing the co-ownership ruling, stating the action was solely for quieting of title, not for settlement of the estate.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the Deed of Conveyance and Deed of Quitclaim were validly executed to transfer ownership to Eduardo, and consequently to Teodora, or whether they were forgeries rendering the transfers void.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petitions and affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision. The legal logic centered on the conclusive finding of forgery. The Court upheld the trial court’s factual determination, based on expert testimony and comparison with admitted genuine signatures, that Juan Pontaoe’s signature on the Deed of Conveyance was forged. Furthermore, it was conclusively established that Dr. Alejandro was in the United States on the date he allegedly signed the Deed of Quitclaim in the Philippines, making its execution impossible. A document bearing a forged signature is void and conveys no title.
Consequently, the transfers to Eduardo based on these void deeds were invalid. The Court of Appeals correctly ordered the cancellation of the derived titles and the reinstatement of the original title, restoring the property to its status before the forged instruments. The Supreme Court clarified that while the forged deeds were nullified, the determination of the ultimate ownership among the heirs (Juan’s successors and Dr. Alejandro) was a separate matter properly within the realm of a special proceeding for settlement of the estate, not the instant action for quieting of title. The action correctly removed the cloud created by the void titles but did not adjudicate the heirs’ distributive shares.