G.R. No. L-6397; August 30, 1955
BLANDINA GAMBOA HILADO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. SALIM JACOB ASSAD and JACOB JOSEPH ASSAD, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The plaintiff, Blandina Gamboa Hilado, is the widow of the late Justice Serafin P. Hilado. She filed an action to annul a deed of sale executed by her husband on May 3, 1943, covering an urban property in Pasay City registered in his name. The property was sold to Salim Jacob Assad, described in the deed as a Filipino citizen. Justice Hilado was taken by the Japanese in January 1945 and was presumed dead. In her complaint, plaintiff initially claimed the property as her exclusive paraphernal property, sold without her knowledge. She later amended her complaint to allege that the real purchaser was defendant Jacob Joseph Assad, a Syrian alien, who used his nephew Salim Jacob Assad as a dummy to circumvent the constitutional prohibition against aliens acquiring land, rendering the sale null and void. Defendants claimed Salim was the real purchaser and Jacob acted merely as his agent under a power of attorney, which was lost. The trial court found the property to be conjugal, that the husband had the power to sell it, but declared the sale null and void, ruling that Jacob Assad was the real purchaser using Salim as a dummy. It ordered the property returned to plaintiff upon reimbursement of the purchase price.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the sale of the property is valid, specifically whether the vendee was the Filipino citizen Salim Jacob Assad or his Syrian uncle Jacob Joseph Assad acting as an alien dummy in violation of the law.

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s decision. It held that the sale was valid and that Salim Jacob Assad was the real purchaser. The Court found no sufficient evidence to support the trial court’s conclusion that Jacob Assad was the actual buyer using Salim as a dummy. The deed of sale expressly identified Salim Jacob Assad as the vendee. The Court rejected the trial court’s premises: (1) the vendor’s death did not prove fraud; (2) the loss of the power of attorney in favor of Jacob was sufficiently proven by testimony; and (3) there was no evidence Jacob lacked funds belonging to Salim to make the purchase. Fraud and violation of law are not presumed. The legal presumption is that men act in good faith. Therefore, the sale to the qualified Filipino citizen was upheld. The complaint was dismissed. The Court also rendered judgment on the counterclaim, ordering plaintiff to pay Salim Jacob Assad P8,700 for unpaid rentals and to return amounts received under a related Court of Appeals decision.