FIRST DIVISION [G.R. No. 165420. June 30, 2005] CONCEPCION R. AINZA, substitute b! "e# $e%&$ "ei#s, 'R.

NA(I)I'A' A. (*+IAO, CORAZON A. JA+ECO &n +I+IA A. O+A,ON, petitioners, vs. -PO*-E- AN(ONIO PA'*A &n E*GENIA PA'*A, respondents. 'ECI-ION ,NARE-.-AN(IAGO, J./ This petition for review on certiorari assails the February 24, 2004 e!ision of the "ourt of #ppeals in "#$%&R& "V No& '02(),*+, an its Septe-ber 2., 2004 resolution, enyin/ re!onsi eration thereof&*2, In her !o-plaint for partition of real property, annul-ent of titles with a-a/es, *(, "on!ep!ion #in0a 1"on!ep!ion2 alle/e that respon ent$spouses 3u/enia 13u/enia2 an #ntonio 4a ua 1#ntonio2 owne a 2+5&40 s6& -& lot with an unfinishe resi ential house lo!ate at No& .7$# Durian !orner 4a8o Sts&, 9aran/ay :uirino 2$", 4ro8e!t 2, :ue0on "ity, !overe by Transfer "ertifi!ate of Title No& 2'+)(7& So-eti-e in #pril +).', she bou/ht one$half of an un ivi e portion of the property fro- her au/hter, 3u/enia an the latter;s husban , #ntonio, for One <un re Thousan 4esos 14+00,000&002& No Dee of #bsolute Sale was e=e!ute to evi en!e the transa!tion, but !ash pay-ent was re!eive by the respon ents, an ownership was transferre to "on!ep!ion throu/h physi!al elivery to her attorney$in$fa!t an au/hter, Nativi a Tuliao 1Nativi a 2& "on!ep!ion authori0e Nativi a an the latter;s husban , "eferino Tuliao 1"eferino2 to o!!upy the pre-ises, an -a>e i-prove-ents on the unfinishe buil in/& Thereafter, "on!ep!ion alle/e that without her !onsent, respon ents !ause the sub ivision of the property into three portions an re/istere it in their na-es un er T"T Nos& N$+77+22, N$+77+2( an N$+77+24 in violation of the restri!tions annotate at the ba!> of the title& On the other han , #ntonio averre that he bou/ht the property in +).0 an intro u!e i-prove-ents thereon& 9etween +).) an +))0, he an his wife, 3u/enia, allowe Nativi a an "eferino to o!!upy the pre-ises te-porarily& In +))4, they !ause the sub ivision of the property an three 1(2 separate titles were issue & Thereafter, #ntonio re6ueste Nativi a to va!ate the pre-ises but the latter refuse an !lai-e that "on!ep!ion owne the property& #ntonio thus file an e8e!t-ent

suit on #pril +, +)))& "on!ep!ion, represente by Nativi a , also file on ?ay 4, +))) a !ivil !ase for partition of real property an annul-ent of titles with a-a/es& #ntonio !lai-e that his wife, 3u/enia, a -itte that "on!ep!ion offere to buy one thir 1+@(2 of the property who /ave her s-all a-ounts over several years whi!h totale 4+00,000&00 by +).' an for whi!h she si/ne a re!eipt& On Aanuary ), 200+, the Re/ional Trial "ourt of :ue0on "ity, 9ran!h .7, ren ere 8u /-ent*4, in favor of "on!ep!ion, the ispositive portion of whi!h statesB C<3R3FOR3, pre-ises !onsi ere , 8u /-ent is hereby ren ere in favor of the plaintiff an a/ainst the efen ants an or erin/B +& the sub ivision of the sub8e!t property between the sai plaintiff an efen ants in e6ual shares with one$half of the property, in!lu in/ the portion o!!upie by the spouses Severino an Nativi a Tuliao to be awar e to the plaintiffD 2& the !an!ellation of Transfer "ertifi!ates of Title Nos& N$+77+22, N$ +77+2(, N$+77+24 of the Re/istry of Dee s of :ue0on "ityD (& the efen ants to pay to the plaintiff 470,000&00 as attorney;s fees& SO ORD3R3D&*7, The trial !ourt uphel the sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion& It rule that the sale was !onsu--ate when both !ontra!tin/ parties !o-plie with their respe!tive obli/ations& 3u/enia transferre possession by eliverin/ the property to "on!ep!ion who in turn pai the pur!hase pri!e& It also e!lare that the transfer of the property i not violate the Statute of Frau s be!ause a fully e=e!ute !ontra!t oes not fall within its !overa/e& On appeal by the respon ents, the "ourt of #ppeals reverse the e!ision of the trial !ourt, an e!lare the sale null an voi & #pplyin/ #rti!le +24 of the Fa-ily "o e, the "ourt of #ppeals rule that sin!e the sub8e!t property is !on8u/al, the written !onsent of #ntonio -ust be obtaine for the sale to be vali & It also or ere the spouses 4a ua to return the a-ount of 4+00,000&00 to petitioners plus interest& *5, The sole issue for resolution in this petition for review is whether there was a vali !ontra!t of sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion& # !ontra!t of sale is perfe!te by -ere !onsent, upon a -eetin/ of the -in s on the offer an the a!!eptan!e thereof base on sub8e!t -atter, pri!e an ter-s of pay-ent&
*',

In this !ase, there was a perfe!te !ontra!t of sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion& The re!or s show that 3u/enia offere to sell a portion of the property to "on!ep!ion, who a!!epte the offer an a/ree to pay 4+00,000&00 as !onsi eration& The !ontra!t of sale was !onsu--ate when both parties fully !o-plie with their respe!tive obli/ations& 3u/enia elivere the property to "on!ep!ion, who in turn, pai 3u/enia the pri!e of One <un re Thousan 4esos 14+00,000&002, as evi en!e by the re!eipt whi!h rea sB R3"3I4T Re!eive the a-ount of ON3 <ENDR3D T<OES#ND 43SOS 14+00,000&002 as pay-ent for the lot on .7$# Durian St&, 4ro8e!t 2, :ue0on "ity, fro- ?rs& "on!ep!ion R& #in0a, on #pril, +).'& FFFFFFF1S/ &2FFFFFF ?rs&& 3u/enia #& 4a ua*., The verbal !ontra!t of sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion i not violate the provisions of the Statute of Frau s that a !ontra!t for the sale of real property shall be unenfor!eable unless the !ontra!t or so-e note or -e-oran u- of the sale is in writin/ an subs!ribe by the party !har/e or his a/ent&*), Chen a verbal !ontra!t has been !o-plete , e=e!ute or partially !onsu--ate , as in this !ase, its enfor!eability will not be barre by the Statute of Frau s, whi!h applies only to an e=e!utory a/ree-ent&*+0, Thus, where one party has perfor-e his obli/ation, oral evi en!e will be a -itte to prove the a/ree-ent& *++, In the instant !ase, the oral !ontra!t of sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion was evi en!e by a re!eipt si/ne by 3u/enia& #ntonio also state that his wife a -itte to hi- that she sol the property to "on!ep!ion& It is un ispute that the sub8e!t property was !on8u/al an sol by 3u/enia in #pril +).' or prior to the effe!tivity of the Fa-ily "o e on #u/ust (, +).., #rti!le 274 of whi!h repeale Title V, 9oo> I of the "ivil "o e provisions on the property relations between husban an wife& <owever, #rti!le 275 thereof li-ite its retroa!tive effe!t only to !ases where it woul not pre8u i!e or i-pair veste or a!6uire ri/hts in a!!or an!e with the "ivil "o e or other laws& In the !ase at bar, veste ri/hts of "on!ep!ion will be i-paire or pre8u i!e by the appli!ation of the Fa-ily "o eD hen!e, the provisions of the "ivil "o e shoul be applie & In Felipe v. Heirs of Aldon, et al.,*+2, the le/al effe!t of a sale of !on8u/al properties by the wife without the !onsent of the husban was !larifie , to witB

The le/al /roun whi!h eserves attention is the le/al effe!t of a sale of lan s belon/in/ to the !on8u/al partnership -a e by the wife without the !onsent of the husban & It is useful at this point to re$state so-e ele-entary rulesB The husban is the a -inistrator of the !on8u/al partnership& 1#rt& +57, "ivil "o e2 Sub8e!t to !ertain e=!eptions, the husban !annot alienate or en!u-ber any real property of the !on8u/al partnership without the wife;s !onsent& 1#rt& +55,Idem&2 #n the wife !annot bin the !on8u/al partnership without the husban ;s !onsent, e=!ept in !ases provi e by law& 1#rt& +'2, Idem&2& In the instant !ase, %i-ena, the wife, sol lan s belon/in/ to the !on8u/al partnership without the !onsent of the husban an the sale is not !overe by the phrase Ge=!ept in !ases provi e by law&H The "ourt of #ppeals es!ribe the sale as Ginvali H I a ter- whi!h is i-pre!ise when use in relation to !ontra!ts be!ause the "ivil "o e uses spe!ifi! na-es in esi/natin/ efe!tive !ontra!ts, na-elyB rescissible 1#rts& +(.0 et seq&2, voidable1#rts& +()0 et seq&2, unenforceable 1#rts& +40(, et seq&2, an void or inexistent 1#rts& +40) et seq&2& ("e s&$e 0& e b! Gi0en& is 1e#t&in$! & e2e1ti3e 1ont#&1t but o2 4"&t 1&te%o#!5 ("e &ns4e#/ it is & 3oi &b$e 1ont#&1t. #!!or in/ to #rt& +()0 of the "ivil "o e, a-on/ the voi able !ontra!ts are G*T,hose where one of the parties is in!apable of /ivin/ !onsent to the !ontra!t&H 14ar& +&2 In the instant !ase %i-ena ha no !apa!ity to /ive !onsent to the !ontra!t of sale& The !apa!ity to /ive !onsent belon/e not even to the husban alone but to both spouses& ("e 3ie4 t"&t t"e 1ont#&1t 0& e b! Gi0en& is & 3oi &b$e 1ont#&1t is su66o#te b! t"e $e%&$ 6#o3ision t"&t 1ont#&1ts ente#e b! t"e "usb&n 4it"out t"e 1onsent o2 t"e 4i2e 4"en su1" 1onsent is #e7ui#e , &#e &nnu$$&b$e &t "e# inst&n1e u#in% t"e 0&##i&%e &n 4it"in ten !e&#s 2#o0 t"e t#&ns&1tion 7uestione . 8A#t. 193, Ci3i$ Co e:. %i-ena;s !ontra!t is not res!issible for in su!h a !ontra!t all the essential ele-ents are untainte but %i-ena;s !onsent was tainte & Neither !an the !ontra!t be !lassifie as unenfor!eable be!ause it oes not fit any of those es!ribe in #rt& +40( of the "ivil "o e& #n finally, the !ontra!t !annot be voi or ine=istent be!ause it is not one of those -entione in #rt& +40) of the "ivil "o e& 9y pro!ess of eli-ination, it -ust perfor!e be a voi able !ontra!t& The voi able !ontra!t of %i-ena was sub8e!t to annul-ent by her husban only urin/ the -arria/e be!ause he was the vi!ti- who ha an interest in the !ontra!t& %i-ena, who was the party responsible for the efe!t, !oul not as> for its annul-ent& Their !hil ren !oul not li>ewise see> the annul-ent of the !ontra!t

while the -arria/e subsiste be!ause they -erely ha an in!hoate ri/ht to the lan s sol & 13-phasis supplie 2 The !onsent of both 3u/enia an #ntonio is ne!essary for the sale of the !on8u/al property to be vali & #ntonio;s !onsent !annot be presu-e &*+(, 3=!ept for the self$ servin/ testi-ony of petitioner Nativi a , there is no evi en!e that #ntonio parti!ipate or !onsente to the sale of the !on8u/al property& 3u/enia alone is in!apable of /ivin/ !onsent to the !ontra!t& Therefore, in the absen!e of #ntonio;s !onsent, the isposition -a e by 3u/enia is voi able&*+4, The !ontra!t of sale between 3u/enia an "on!ep!ion bein/ an oral !ontra!t, the a!tion to annul the sa-e -ust be !o--en!e within si= years fro- the ti-e the ri/ht of a!tion a!!rue &*+7, 3u/enia sol the property in #pril +).' hen!e #ntonio shoul have as>e the !ourts to annul the sale on or before #pril +))(& No a!tion was !o--en!e by #ntonio to annul the sale, hen!e his ri/ht to see> its annul-ent was e=tin/uishe by pres!ription& 3ven assu-in/ that the ten 1+02$year pres!riptive perio un er #rt& +'( shoul apply, #ntonio is still barre fro- institutin/ an a!tion to annul the sale be!ause sin!e #pril +).', -ore than ten 1+02 years ha alrea y lapse without any su!h a!tion bein/ file & In su-, the sale of the !on8u/al property by 3u/enia without the !onsent of her husban is voi able& It is bin in/ unless annulle & #ntonio faile to e=er!ise his ri/ht to as> for the annul-ent within the pres!ribe perio , hen!e, he is now barre fro- 6uestionin/ the vali ity of the sale between his wife an "on!ep!ion& ;<ERE=ORE, the petition is %R#NT3D& The e!ision ate February 24, 2004 of the "ourt of #ppeals in "#$%&R& "V No& '02() an its resolution ate Septe-ber 2., 2004 are R3V3RS3D an S3T #SID3& The e!ision ate Aanuary ), 200+ of the Re/ional Trial "ourt of :ue0on "ity, 9ran!h .7, in "ivil "ase No& :$ ))$('72), is R3INST#T3D& -O OR'ERE'. Davide, Jr., C.J. (Chairman , !uisumbin", Carpio, an A#cuna, JJ., !on!ur.