CAMPER REALTY CORP. VS. MARIA NENA PAJO-REYES,ET AL.

Facts:
1. Mar. 27, 1974 -Respondent Rodolfo Pajo caused the notarization of an SPA
purportedly by his four siblings Maria, Godofredo, Tito & Isais (Atty. Naraval) ---
w/c authorized him to sell a parcel of land in Davao City covered by TCT under
the name of the siblings
2. Mar. 28, 1974 he sold the land to Ligaya who caused the cancellation of the
TCT & issued a new one for Ligaya
3. Mar. 30, 1974 Atty. Naraval observed that the signatures of the siblings were
forged w/c made him send letters to the other siblings regarding the
cancellation of the SPA from his notarial register
4. July 16, 1986 Ligayas son, Agusto, caused the cancellation of the TCT in his
Mothers name upon her death via Partition Agreement
5. 1992 Agusto caused the division of the property into 2 but before the
completion of the technical survey, he sold the bigger portion to petitioner
Camper Realty although the land was still registered in Agustos name & he
retained the smaller portion for himself
6. 1993 respondent Nena (sister of Rodolfo) filed a complaint against Agusto,
Rodolfo & Godofredo for declaration of nullity and/or inexistence of contracts,
cancellation of title, quieting of title & possession, damages, atty.s fee w/ PI &
TRO
7. RTC issued TRO against Agusto
8. Nena amended the complaint & impleaded Camper upon knowledge of the
sale alleging that no right could have been transmitted to Ligaya & subsequent
transferees since the SPA had been forged
9. Davao RTC dismissed the complaint of Nena on the ground of laches & that
the transfer from Rodolfo to Ligaya could have been invalid for forgery of the
SPA however, the court cannot invalidate the subsequent transfer of the
property to Agusto-to-Camper
10. CA reversed Agusto did not acquire any better right than his mother, Ligaya

Issue: W/N Camper has a better right over the property upon relying on the title of
Agusto?

Held: YES!
1. Although the acquisition of Agusto as his share in his mothers estate was on the
basis of a forged SPA, Agustos title must be cancelled, however, Camper,
acquired a portion of the said property in good faith & for value
2. A person dealing with a registered land has a right to rely on the Torrens COT &
to dispense w/ the need of inquiring further except when the party has actual
knowledge of facts & circumstances that would impel a reasonably cautious
man to make such inquiry or when the purchaser has knowledge of the defect in
title of the vender (w/c is not true in this case)
a. Nena did not present proff of any circumstance that could serve as
caveat for Camper to undertake searching investigation
b. Ligaya registed it in 1974, Agusto in 1986 & there was no encumberance
or lien annotated
3. Agustos title is defeasible, he having acquired no better right than that of his
mother, however, his title becomes conclusive & indefeasible in the hands of
Camper, being an innocent purchaser for value & in good faith.