G.R. No. L-1493; April 21, 1948
ANTONIA ESPINA, petitioner, vs. CATALINA COLINA and BENITO NATIVIDAD, ex-judge of First Instance of Cebu, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Antonia Espina sought the annulment of a decree declaring respondent Catalina Colina the owner of Lot No. 2611, Hacienda de Mandawe. Espina claimed ownership by virtue of Original Certificate of Title No. 34386, issued after she purchased the lot from the Seminario de San Carlos de Cebu. She alleged that after a decree in her favor became final, Colina filed a motion to reopen the case, which was granted without notice to the Seminario, and that the respondent judge subsequently adjudicated the lot to Colina without revoking Espina’s certificate of title. Colina countered that Espina’s title was obtained through fraud, and that the Court of Appeals had already annulled Espina’s decree in a prior case (C.A. No. 7116), remanding the matter for further proceedings. Following that remand, the Court of First Instance of Cebu, presided by Judge Natividad, rendered a decision on September 2, 1941, declaring Colina the owner, which became final for lack of appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the petition for annulment of the decree in favor of Catalina Colina should be granted.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition. It found that the material facts—specifically the final and executory decision of the Court of Appeals annulling Espina’s decree for fraud, and the subsequent final decision of the Court of First Instance declaring Colina the owner—were concealed by Espina in her petition. Had these facts been disclosed, the Court would have dismissed the petition outright. Espina’s proper remedy against the trial court’s decision was an appeal, not a petition for annulment. Costs were imposed on the petitioner.

AI Generated by Armztrong.