Scribd
Upload
161 views

Development Bank of The Philippines Vs CA

DBP bought 159 lots totaling 91,188.30 square meters from PHHC in 1955. In 1958, PHHC approved the sale of 2 of the lots to the Nicandro spouses but only provided a duplicate copy, not the original document. The Nicandro sought to register the duplicate but were denied as they did not have the original. The court ruled the agreement between DBP and PHHC void since PHHC showed bad faith by selling land already sold to DBP when it approved the sale to the Nicandro spouses.

Uploaded by

druglordjfc
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
161 views

Development Bank of The Philippines Vs CA

DBP bought 159 lots totaling 91,188.30 square meters from PHHC in 1955. In 1958, PHHC approved the sale of 2 of the lots to the Nicandro spouses but only provided a duplicate copy, not the original document. The Nicandro sought to register the duplicate but were denied as they did not have the original. The court ruled the agreement between DBP and PHHC void since PHHC showed bad faith by selling land already sold to DBP when it approved the sale to the Nicandro spouses.

Uploaded by

druglordjfc
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Development Bank of the Philippines vs CA

GR No, L - 28774
September 21 1982
DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,
vs.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, HON. HERMOGENES CALUAG, JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST
INSTANCE OF RIZAL, and SPOUSES HONESTO G. NICANDRO and ELISA F. NICANDRO,
respondents.
Facts:
There were 159 lots that was bought by DBP from the PHHC with a total of 91,188.30 square meters
located in Diliman Estate Subdivision West Triangle Quezon City.This was on made on Oct 25,
1955. But on October 14, 1958 the Acting General Manager of PHHC approved an order for sale of
lots Nos. 2 and 4 to the spouses Nicandro but only giving them duplicate duplicate copy of the sale.
The Nicandro then sought to register the dupilicate but was denied by local civil registry on the
premise that they do not have the copy of the original. Hence the petition of the Nicandros to
declare the agreement of DBP to PHHC void.
The court then declared the agreement null and void between DBP and PHHC
ISSUE:
Whether or not the legality of the agreement between DBP and PHHC is void
Ruling:
Petition is DENIED. Yes, the agreement between DBP and PHCC is void. The PHHC instead of
ratifying it instead repudiated it by selling it to the Nicandro. It is manifested that bad faith was shown
by selling a land that is already sold

You might also like