G.R. No. 40791 ; November 20, 1934
PEDRO ESCUTIN, DOMINGA ESCUTIN, assisted by her husband Jose Bauson, CONSUELO ESCUTIN, assisted by her husband Gregorio Castañeda, and CAROLINA ESCUTIN, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. SOCORRO ESCUTIN, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Sabas Escutin, married to Paula Arboly and father of the plaintiffs, left his family and lived with his mistress, Juana Yap. The defendant, Socorro Escutin, is Juana Yap’s daughter and lived with them. Twelve days before his death, Sabas executed a deed of sale conveying a parcel of land to Socorro for P1,925, despite its market value being P3,750. After Sabas’ death, the plaintiffs (his legitimate children) filed an action to annul the deed, alleging it was simulated and fraudulent. The defendant claimed the price was paid in cash, but evidence showed she and her mother had no known source of income to pay such an amount, and witnesses testified the sale was a scheme to secure Socorro’s future upon Sabas’ death, with no actual money delivered.

ISSUE

Whether the deed of sale executed by Sabas Escutin in favor of Socorro Escutin is null and void for lack of consideration.

RULING

Yes, the deed of sale is null and void. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s finding that the stated consideration was fictitious and the contract was executed in fraud of the plaintiffs. The evidence established that no actual payment was made, and the defendant had no means to pay the purchase price. Under Article 1275 of the Civil Code, contracts without consideration produce no effect. The simulated transfer, being without consideration, is treated as non-existent. The Court noted that while the trial court erred in admitting irrelevant allegations regarding Socorro’s paternity, such error did not affect the outcome based on the lack of consideration.

AI Generated by Armztrong.