CIVREV1 PROPERTY RELATIONSRepublic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaFIRST DIVISIONG.R. No. L-55322 February 16, 1989MOSES !OCSON, petitioner, vs."ON. COURT OF #PPE#LS, #GUSTN# !OCSON-$#S%UE&, ERNESTO $#S%UE&, respondents.Dolorfino and Dominguez Law Officers for petitioner.Gabriel G. Mascardo for private respondents.ME'#L'E#, J.:This is a petition for revie on certiorari under Rule !" of the Rules of #ourt of the decision of the #ourt of $ppeals in #$% &.R. No. '(!)!, pro*ul+ated on $pril (,, -./,, entitled 0MOIS1S 2O#SON, plaintiff%appellee, versus $&3STIN$ 2O#SON%V$S4315 and 1RN1STO V$S4315, defendant%appellants,0 upholdin+ the validit6 of three 7(8 docu*ents 9uestioned b6 Moises 2ocson, in total reversal of the decision of the then #ourt of First Instance of #avite, :ranch I, hich declaredthe* as null and void; and of its resolution, dated Septe*ber (,, -./,, den6in+ therein appelleeandra Poblete, hile respondent 1rnesto Vas9ue= is the husband of $+ustina. $le>andra Poblete predeceased her husband ithout her intestate estate bein+settled. Subse9uentl6, 1*ilio 2ocson also died intestate on $pril -, -.)?.$s adverted to above, the present controvers6 concerns the validit6 of three 7(8 docu*ents e@ecutedb6 1*ilio 2ocson durin+ his lifeti*e. These docu*ents purportedl6 conve6ed, b6 sale, to $+ustina 2ocson%Vas9ue= hat apparentl6 covers al*ost all of his properties, includin+ his one%third 7-A(8 share in the estate of his ife. Petitioner Moises 2ocson assails these docu*ents and pra6s that the6 be declared null and void and the properties sub>ect *atter therein be partitioned beteen hi* and $+ustina as the onl6 heirs of their deceased parents.The docu*ents, hich ere presented as evidence not b6 Moises 2ocson, as the part6 assailin+ its validit6, but rather b6 herein respondents, are the folloin+B-8 0Kasulatan ng Bilihan ng Lupa,0 *arCed as 1@hibit ( 7pp. -?%-(, Records8 for the defendant in the court a quo, dated 2ul6 ?), -.'/. :6 this docu*ent 1*ilio 2ocson sold to $+ustina 2ocson%Vas9ue= si@ 7'8 parcels of land, all located at Naic, #avite, for the su* of ten thousand P-,,,,,.,, pesos. On the sa*e docu*ent 1*ilio 2ocson acCnoled+ed receipt of the purchase price, thusBa nga!on" alang#alang sa halagang $%M&'G L(BOG &($O )&*+"+++, salaping &ilipino na a-ing tinanggap ng buong -asi!ahan loob at ang pag-a-atanggap a! a-ing ha!agang inaamin sa pamamagitan ng -asulatang ito" sa a-ing ana- na si %gustina .ocson" na *a6 sapat na +ulan+, *a*a*a6an+ Pilipino, asaa ni 1rnesto Vas9ue=, at naninirahan sa Poblacion, Naic, #avite, a6 aCin+ ipina+bile n+ lubusan at Ca+6at at alan+ ano *an+ pasubali an+ naban++it na ani* na pirason+ lupa na nasa unan+ dahon n+ doCu*enton+ ito, sa naban++it na $+ustina 2ocson, at sa Cani6an+ ta+apa+*ana o *aCaCahalili at +a6on din nais -ong banggitin na -ahit na ma! -amurahan ang ginawa -ong pagbibile a! dahilan sa ang na-abile a! a-ing ana- na sa a-in at mapagling-od" madama!in at ma#alalahanin" na tulad din ng isa -o pang ana- na lala-i. $n+ Cuartan+ tinan++ap Co na P-,,,,,.,,, a6 +a+a*itin Co sa aCin+ Catandaan at *+a hulin+ ara at sa aCin+ *+a iban+ *ahahala+an+ pan+an+ailan+an. D1*phasis suppliedENa nais Co rin+ ban++itin na an+ +inaa Con+ ito a6 hindi laba+ sa ano *an+ batas oCautusan, sapa+Cat an+ aCin+ pina+bile a6 aCin at nasa aCin+ pan+alan. $n+ *+a lupan+ nasa pan+alan n+ aCin+ nasiran+ asaa a6 hindi Co +ina+ala ni pinaCiCiala*an at i6on a6 dapat na hatiin n+ dalaa Con+ anaC alinsunod sa u*iiral na batas 7p. -(, Records.8?8 0Kasulatan ng Ganap na Bilihan,0dated 2ul6 ?),-.'/, *arCed as 1@hibit ! 7p. -!, Records8. On the face of this docu*ent, 1*ilio 2ocson purportedl6 sold to $+ustina 2ocson%Vas9ue=, for the su* of FIV1 TFO3S$ND 7P",,,,.,,8 P1SOS, to rice *ills and a ca*arin 7camalig8 located at Naic, #avite. $s in the first docu*ent, Moises 2ocson acCnoled+ed receipt of the purchase priceBu+al properties of 1*ilio 2ocson and $le>andra Poblete hich the for*er, therefore, cannot validl6 sell 7pp. "(, "), Record on $ppeal8. $s far as 1@hibit ? is concerned, petitioner 9uestions not the e@tra>udicial partition but onl6 the sale b6 his father to $+ustina of the for*erudicial declaration of nullit6 of 1@hibits ( and ! on the +round of si*ulated price, is i*prescriptible.II.For petitioner, hoever, the above discussion *a6 be purel6 acade*ic. The burden of proof in shoin+ that contracts lacC consideration rests on he ho alle+ed it. The de+ree of proof beco*es *ore strin+ent here the docu*ents the*selves sho that the vendor acCnoled+ed receipt of the price, and *ore so here the docu*ents ere notari=ed, as in the case at bar. 3pon consideration of the records of this case, He are of the opinion that petitioner has not sufficientl6 proven that the 9uestioned docu*ents are ithout consideration.Firstl6, Moises 2ocsonect *atter therein are con>u+al properties of 1*ilio 2ocson and $le>andra Poblete. It is the position of petitioner that since the properties sold to $+ustina 2ocson%Vas9ue= under 1@hibit ( ere re+istered in the na*e of 01*ilio 2ocson, *arried to $le>andra Poblete,0 the certificates of title he presented as evidence 71@hibits 01u+al partnership, unlessit be proved that it pertains e@clusivel6 to the husband or to the ife.In #obb%Pere= vs. Fon. &re+orio Gantin, No. G%??(?,, Ma6 ??, -.'/, ?( S#R$ '(), '!!, He held thatB$nent their clai* that the shares in 9uestion are con>u+al assets, the spouses Pere= adduced not a *odicu* of evidence, althou+h the6 repeatedl6 invoCed article -', of the Ne #ivil #ode hich provides that ... . $s interpreted b6 this #ourt, the part6 ho invoCes this presu*ption *ust first prove that the propert6 in controvers6 as ac9uired durin+ the *arria+e. In other ords, proof of ac9uisition durin+ the coverture is a condition sine qua non for the operation of the presu*ption in favor of con>u+al onership. Thus in 0amia de 1e!es vs. 1e!es de (lano D'? Phil. '?., '(.E, it as held that 0accordin+ to la and >urisprudence, it is sufficient to prove that the Propert6 as ac9uired durin+ the *arria+e in order that the sa*e *a6 be dee*ed con>u+al propert6.0 In the recent case ofMaramba vs. Lozano" et. al. DG%?-"((, 2une ?., -.'), ?, S#R$ !)!E, this #ourt, thru Mr. 2ustice MaCalintal, reiterated that 0the presu*ption under $rticle -', of the #ivil #ode refers to propert6 ac9uired durin+ the*arria+e,0 and then concluded that since 0there is no shoin+ as to hen the propert6 in 9uestion as ac9uired...the fact that the title is in the ifeandra Poblete.He are not un*indful that in nu*erous cases He consistentl6 held that re+istration of the propert6 inthe na*e of onl6 one spouse does not ne+ate the possibilit6 of it bein+ con>u+al 7See :uco6 vs. Paulino, No. G%?"))", $pril ?', -.'/, ?( S#R$ ?!/8. :ut this rulin+ is not inconsistent ith the above pronounce*ent for in those cases there as proof that the properties, thou+h re+istered in the na*e of onl6 one spouse, ere indeed con>u+al properties, or that the6 have been ac9uired durin+ the *arria+e of the spouses, and therefore, presu*ed con>u+al, ithout the adverse part6 havin+ presented proof to rebut the presu*ption 7See Mendo=a vs% Re6es, No. G%(-'-/, $u+ust -), -./(, -?! S#R$ -"!8.In the instant case, had petitioner, Moises 2ocson, presented sufficient proof to sho that the disputed properties ere ac9uired durin+ his parents< coverture. He ould have ruled that the properties, thou+h re+istered in the na*e of 1*ilio 2ocson alone, are con>u+al properties in vie of the presu*ption under $rticle -',. There bein+ no such proof, the condition sine qua non for the application of the presu*ption does not e@ist. Necessaril6, He rule that the properties under 1@hibit ( are the e@clusive properties of 1*ilio 2ocson.There bein+ no shoin+ also that the ca*arin and the to rice*ills, hich are the sub>ect of 1@hibit !, ere con>u+al properties of the spouses 1*ilio 2ocson and $le>andra Poblete, the6 should be considered, liCeise, as the e@clusive properties of 1*ilio 2ocson, the burden of proof bein+ on petitioner.$##ORDIN&GI, the petition is DISMISS1D and the decision of the #ourt of $ppeals is $FFIRM1D.SO ORD1R1D.arvasa" 0ruz" Ganca!co and Gri2o#%quino" ..." concur.Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaS1#OND DIVISIONG.R. No(. )8583-* Mar+, 26, 199-.ENGNO TO'#, !R., petitioner, /(.COURT OF #PPE#LS a01 ROSE M#RE TU#SON-TO'#, re(2o01e03(.G.R. No(.)8696-) Mar+, 26,199-ROSE M#RE TU#SON-TO'#, 2e3434o0er, /(..ENGNO TO'#, !R., re(2o01e03.Bautista, Picazo, Buyco, Tan & Fider for Benigno Toda, Jr. Belo, Abiera & Associates for petitioner Rose Marie Tuason Toda. REG#L#'O, J.:T,e(e +o0(o541a3e1 +a(e( (ee6 a re/4e7 o8 3,e 1e+4(4o0 o8 3,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( 2ro9u5:a3e1 o0 !a0uary 29,198) 1 40 C#-G.R. C$ No(. -66)5 a01 -)936, 3,e 14(2o(434/e 2or34o0 o8 7,4+, rea1(;2? #55 (,are( o8 (3o+6 40 Sa0 N:ue5 Cor2ora34o0 re:4(3ere1 (o5e5y 40 3,e 0a9e o8 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a 7,e3,er(3o+6 14/41e01( or (3o+6( a+Eu4re1 o0 2re-e9234/e r4:,3( 40+5u140: 3,o(e a+Eu4re1 40 3,e 0a9e( o8 bo3, 2e3434o0er( .e04:0o To1a, !r. a01 Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a >7,e3,er=o4035y or a53er0a3e5y Fa01HorF?, 8ree 8ro9 a55 54e0( a01 e0+u9bra0+e(.>3? #55 (,are( o8 (3o+6 40 Sa0 M4:ue5 Cor2ora34o0 a+Eu4re1 7,e3,er a( (3o+6 14/41e01( o8 or o0 2re-e9234/e C4:,3a 2er3a4040: 3o 3,e (,are( o8 (3o+6 40 (a41 +or2ora34o0 o8 2e3434o0erRo(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1aF( bro3,er 3,e 5a3e Ma0ue5 Tua(o0, !r. >o8+our(e, 3,e or4:40a5 (,are( o8 3,e 5a33er 2er3a40 3o 2e3434o0er Ro(eMar4e Tua(o0 To1a a5(o?, 8ree 8ro9 a55 54e0( a01 e0+u9bra0+e( eA+e23 8or 3,e e(3a3e 3aA 54e0. Pe3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a,ereby :ra03( 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. a0 4rre/o+ab5e 2roAy, 8or 3,ree year( 3,rou:, 3,e 1983 (3o+6,o51er(F 9ee340: 7,e3,er a00ua5 or (2e+4a5 3o e5e+3 14re+3or( 8or a55 (,are( o8 (3o+6 (,e o70( 14re+35y or 4014re+35y 40+5u140: 3,o(e 8ro9 3,e 5a3e Ma0ue5 Tua(o0, !r. 40 Sa0 M4:ue5 Cor2ora34o0.>*? T,e .a0aba Forbe( Par6 +o0=u:a5 17e5540: a01 43( +o03e03( 8ree 8ro9 a55 54e0( a01 e0+u9bra0+e( eA+e23 3,a3 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. (,a55 re9o/e 3,ere8ro9 ,4( 2er(o0a5 e88e+3( 40+5u140: 8ur043ure a01 a2254a0+e( 40 ,4( (3u1y roo9 a01 T.$. roo9 a01, 8ro9 3,e 8a945y roo40, a55 a034Eue(, ru:(, 2a40340:( o8 O51 For3 Ma045a, boo6( a01 9e9e03o(. Pe3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. +o9943( 3,a3 0o (er/a03 0o7 54/40: 40 3,e To5e0340o (3ree3 a2ar39e03( (,a55 be e/4+3e1.>5? T,e Sa0 Fra0+4(+o a2ar39e03 a3 #2ar39e03 9-5, No. 1)5- Tay5or S3ree3, Sa0 Fra0+4(+o, Ca548or04a, U.S#., a01 43( +o03e03(, 8ree 8ro9 a55 54e0( a01 e0+u9bra0+e(, eA+e23 3,a3 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. (,a55 re9o/e 3,ere8ro9 ,4( 2er(o0a5 e88e+3(.>6? T,e ar348a+3( a5rea1y re9o/e1 by 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a 8ro9 3,e Ma1r41 #2ar39e03 a3 No. * Sa0 Pe1ro 1e $a514/4a. S,e (,a55 re3ur0 3o 43 43( (45/er 7are, +,40a 7are, 2a40340:( a01 e3+,40:(. S,e 9ay re3a40 3,e 3,ree 8a0( e0+a(e1 40:5a(( a01 9ay re9o/e ,er +5o3,e(, 2er8u9e( a01 3o45e3r4e(, 3,e Sa0(a 2a40340: o8a (,e55 1e14+a3e1 3o ,er, 3,e 2a40340: o8 3,e Ma1o00a a01 3a2e(3ry ,a0:40: 40 ,er be1roo9, 5 Per(4a0 ru:(, 1 7r4340: 1e(6 a01 +,a4r a01 3,e 2 5a92( 3,ereo0 a01 1 5a92 o0 3,e 04:,3 3ab5e, a01 3,e (3a3ue33e :4/e0 ,er by "a:e1or0.>)? !e7e5ry.>8? Mo3or /e,4+5e( re:4(3ere1 40 ,er 0a9e.>9? *5? 1ay( 8ro9 (4:040: o8 3,4( a:ree9e03, O0e M4554o0 Pe(o( >P5,---,---.--? a( a33or0ey(F 8ee( G 2e3434o0erRo(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a a:ree40: 3o ,o51 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. ,ar95e(( 8ro9 a0y +5a49 8o a33or0ey(F 8ee( a01 eA2e0(e( 3,a3 9ay be 845e1 a:a40(3 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 or ,er(e58 8or (er/4+e( re01ere1 3o ,er 40 3,e 2ro(e+u34o0 o8 ,er +5a49( a:a40(3 (a41 +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 or a:a40(3 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. or 3o (e+ure ,er 2ara2,er0a5 e(3a3e.>1-? T7o (,are( 743, 37o 5o3( 40 $a55ey Go58 I Cou03ry C5ub.>11? O0e (,are 40 C5ub Puer3a 1e "4erro 40 Ma1r41, S2a40 48 3,ere 4( o0e re:4(3ere1 40 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1aF( 0a9e.>12? S,are 40 Mo03e9ar .ea+, C5ub 40 .a:a+, .a3aa0 G 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a a:ree40: 3o a((u9e 3,e ba5a0+e o8 3,e a+Eu4(434o0 +o(3 3,ereo8.>+? #55 o3,er 2ro2er34e( o8 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 o8 7,a3e/er a01 7,ere/er 5o+a3e1 (,a55 be a1=u14+a3e1 3o 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. e/e0 3,ou:, a+Eu4re1 40 3,e 0a9e o8 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a or bo3, o8 3,e9 G (,e u01er3a640: 3o eAe+u3e 3,e +orre(2o0140: 1ee1( o8 +o0/eya0+e(.>1? Pe3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. (,a55 a((u9e 3,e 2ay9e03 o8 a55 +o0=u:a5 ob54:a34o0(, 2e3434o0er Ro(e Mar4e Tua(o0 To1a re2re(e0340: a01 7arra0340: 3,a3 (,e ,a( 0o 2e0140: ob54:a34o0 or 40+urre1 0o ob54:a34o0 +,ar:eab5e 3o 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 eA+e23 3,o(e 54(3e1 40 #00eA F#F ,ereo8.8 3,e Ro(ar4a #2ar39e03 4( (ub=e+3 3o a 9or3:a:e 5oa0 a01 (u+, 5oa0 4( a +o0=u:a5 1eb3, 2e3434o0er .e04:0o To1a, !r. (,a55 a((u9e (u+, 5oa0 a01 (,a55 ob3a40 3,e 14(+,ar:e o8 3,e 9or3:a:e.>e? #83er 3,e (4:040: o8 3,4( 1o+u9e03;>1? Ea+, o8 3,e9 (,a55 o70, 14(2o(e o8, 2o((e((, a19404(3er a01 e0=oy ,4( or ,er (e2ara3e e(3a3e, 2re(e03 a01 8u3ure, 743,ou3 3,e +o0(e03 o8 3,e o3,er@>2? #55 ear040:( 8ro9 a0y 2ro8e((4o0 bu(40e(( or 401u(3ry (,a55 546e74(e be5o0: 3o ea+, o8 3,e9 re(2e+34/e5y@>3? #55 eA2e0(e( a01 ob54:a34o0( 40+urre1 by ea+, o8 3,e9 (,a55 be 3,e4r re(2e+34/e a01 (e2ara3e re(2o0(4b45434e(.>8? a? #22ro/40: 3,e a:ree9e03 8or /o5u03ary 14((o5u34o0 a01 2ar3434o0 o8 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42@>b? 1e+5ar40: 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 o8 2e3434o0er( 14((o5/e1 a01 a1=u14+a340:3o ea+, o8 3,e9 ,4( or ,er (,are 40 3,e 2ro2er34e( a01 a((e3( o8 (a41 +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 40 a++or1a0+e 743, 3,e a:ree9e03 e9bo14e1 40 2ara:ra2, * ,ereo8@ a01>+? e0=o4040: 3,e 2ar34e( 3o +o925y 743, 3,e 3er9( a01 +o01434o0( o8 3,e a8ore(a41 a:ree9e03.11ro04+a55y, 3,e (a41 a:ree9e03 8a45e1 3o 8u55y (ub(er/e 3,e 403e01e1 a94+ab5e (e335e9e03 o8 a55 3,e 14(2u3e( o8 3,e (2ou(e(. 0(3ea1, a( 5a9e03e1 by 3,e +ou0(e5 o8 o0e o8 3,e9, 3,e +o92ro94(e a:ree9e03 7,4+, 7a( 1e(4:0e1 3o 3er940a3e a 5434:a34o0 (2a70e1 37o 0e7 2e3434o0(, 743, ea+, 2ar3y 40434a340: o0e a:a40(3 3,e o3,er. T,u(, 455u(3ra34/e o8 3,e (ay40: 3,a3 a (o5u34o0 7,4+, +rea3e( a0o3,er 2rob5e9 4( 0o (o5u34o0, 3,e +o03ra14+3ory 403er2re3a34o0( 25a+e1 by 3,e 2ar34e( o0 (o9e 2ro/4(4o0( o8 3,e a:ree9e03 re(u53e1 40 a22ea5( 3o re(2o01e03+our3 a01, e/e03ua55y, 3,e 2re(e03 re+our(e 3o u(..e04:0o a22ea5e1 8ro9 3,e a8ore(3a3e1 or1er( o8 3,e 3r4a5 +our3 o8 No/e9ber 2-, 1981, !u0e 2,1982, 'e+e9ber 9, 1982, Mar+, 1, 1983 a01 Mar+, 1*, 1983 +o03a4040: 3,e 14re+34/e( ,ere40be8ore re(2e+34/e5y (e3 ou3. T,e (a9e 7ere 14(2o(e1 o8 by 3,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( a( eA25a40e1 a3 3,e (3ar3 o8 3,4( 1e+4(4o0.Ro(e Mar4e 0o7 (ub943( 3,a3 3,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( erre1;1. 0 ,o5140: 3,a3 3,e +o92ro94(e a:ree9e03 o8 3,e 2ar34e( ,ere40 be+a9e e88e+34/e o05y a83er 43( =u14+4a5 a22ro/a5 o0 !u0e 9, 1981 a01 0o3 u2o0 43( eAe+u34o0 o0 Mar+, 3-,1981@2. 0 (e3340: a(41e 3,e or1er o8 3,e 5o7er +our3 1a3e1 !u0e 2, 1981 14re+340: .e04:0o 3o 2ay 403ere(3 o8 e4:,3ee0 2er+e03 a01 0o0-2ay9e03 2e0a53y o8 84/e 2er+e03@ a013. 0 (e3340: a(41e 3,e or1er o8 3,e 5o7er +our3 14re+340: 3,e a00o3a34o0 o8 Ro(e Mar4eF( 54e0 o0 .e04:0oF( 2ro2er3y. 12O0 3,e o3,er ,a01, .e04:0o +o03e01( 40 ,4( 2re(e03 2e3434o0 be8ore u( 3,a3;1. T,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( erre1 o0 a Eue(34o0 o8 5a7 7,e0 43 a884r9e1 3,e 5o7er +our3F( a7ar1 o8 P*,623,929.2* 743,ou3 3r4a5 a01 e/41e0+e-3a640: a01 o/erru5e1 2e3434o0erF( +5a49 o8 /4o5a34o0 o8 ,4( 1ue 2ro+e(( r4:,3@2. T,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( erre1 o0 a Eue(34o0 o8 5a7 a01 1ue 2ro+e(( 7,e0 43 u2,e51 3,e 5o7er +our3F( 1e04a5 o8 2e3434o0erF( 9o34o0 8or ,er 40,4b434o0H14(Eua5484+a34o0@3. S40+e 3,e 1o+u9e03 >3,e 2ar34e(F +o92ro94(e a:ree9e03? eA254+435y 2ro/41e18or a((u9234o0 o8 54ab4543y ra3,er 3,a0 a:e0+y 3o 2ay a01 (40+e 3,ere 7a( 0o e/41e0+e-3a640:, 3,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( 840140: o8 a0 a:e0+y 3o 2ay 4( re/4e7ab5ea( a Eue(34o0 o8 5a7@ a01*. T,e Cour3 o8 #22ea5( o0 a Eue(34o0 o8 5a7 40/o5/40: 3,e 2aro5 e/41e0+e ru5e. 13T,e a7ar1 o8 +a(, 14/41e01( ba(4+a55y 1e2e01( o0 3,e 1a3e o8 e88e+34/43y o8 3,e +o92ro94(e a:ree9e03 a( 3,4( 7455 1e3er940e 7,e3,er 3,e (a9e 4( +o0=u:a5 2ro2er3y or (e2ara3e 2ro2er3y o8 3,e (2ou(e(.4?0 3,e ab(e0+e o8 a0 eA2re(( 1e+5ara34o0 40 3,e 9arr4a:e (e335e9e03(, 3,e (e2ara34o0 o8 2ro2er3y be37ee0 (2ou(e( 1ur40: 3,e 9arr4a:e (,a55 0o3 3a6e 25a+e (a/e 40 /4r3ue o8 a =u14+4a5 or1er.D "e0+e, 3,e (e2ara34o0 o8 2ro2er3y 4( 0o3 e88e+3e1 by 3,e 9ere eAe+u34o0 o8 3,e +o03ra+3 or a:ree9e03 o8 3,e 2ar34e(, bu3 by 3,e 1e+ree o8 3,e +our3 a22ro/40: 3,e (a9e. 3, 3,ere8ore, be+o9e( e88e+34/e o0 y u2o0 =u14+4a5 a22ro/a5, 743,ou3 7,4+, 43 4( /o41. 15 Fur3,er9ore, #r34+5e 192 o8 (a41 Co1e eA254+435y 2ro/41e( 3,a3 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 4( 14((o5/e1 o05y u2o0 3,e 4((ua0+e o8 a 1e+ree o8 (e2ara34o0 o8 2ro2er3y.Co0(eEue035y, 3,e +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42 o8 .e04:0o a01 Ro(e Mar4e (,ou51 be +o0(41ere1 14((o5/e1 o05y o0 !u0e 9, 1981 7,e0 3,e 3r4a5 +our3 a22ro/e1 3,e4r =o403 2e3434o0 8or /o5u03ary 14((o5u34o0 o8 3,e4r +o0=u:a5 2ar30er(,42. Co08or9ab5y 3,ere3o, 3,e +a(, 14/41e01( 1e+5are1 o0 !u5y 1, 1981 a01 !u5y 25,1981 40 3,e a9ou03 o8 P2,191.62 a01 P*-,196.12, re(2e+34/e5y, (,ou51 2er3a40 3o Ro(e Mar4e@ a01 3,a3 1e+5are1 o0 #2r45 2,5, 1981 40 3,e a9ou03 o8 P3),126.3-ou:,3 3o be 2a41 3o .e04:0o, 2ur(ua03 3o Para:ra2, * >+? o8 3,e +o92ro94(e a:ree9e03 7,4+,a7ar1( 3o .e04:0o 3,e +o0=u:a5 a((e3( 0o3 o3,er74(e (2e+484+a55y a((4:0e1 3o Ro(e Mar4e.eelr6 for sale valued at -..,/." Fon+Con+ dollars or P(?-,/(,..". * Hhen Latrina failed to return the pieces of >eelr6 ithin the ?,%da6 period a+reed upon, $nita #han de*anded pa6*ent of their value.On Septe*ber -/, -.)?, Latrina issued in favor of $nita #han a checC for P"",,,, hich, hoever, as dishonored for lacC of funds. Fence, Latrina as char+ed ith estafa before the then #ourt of First Instance of Pa*pan+a and $n+eles #it6, :ranch IV. 5 $fter trial, the loer court rendered a decision dis*issin+ the case on the +round that Latrinaudiciall6 foreclosed b6 the Rural :anC of Porac, Pa*pan+a on account of the *ort+a+e loan of P/,,,, hich Ro*arico andLatrina had obtained fro* said banC. The propert6 as sold b6 the sheriff to the hi+hest bidder for P"),,,, on Septe*ber ., -.)). On Septe*ber -!, -.)/, 2uanito Santos, ho had earlier bou+ht the sa*e propert6 at public auction on Nove*ber --, -.)), redee*ed it b6 pa6in+ the su* of P"),,,, plus the le+al interest of P',/!,.,, or a total a*ount of P'(,/!,.,,. 13$bout a *onth before such rede*ption or on $u+ust /, - .)/, Ro*arico filed an action for the annul*ent of the decision in #ivil #ase No. ???! as ell as the rit of e@ecution, lev6 on e@ecution and the auction sale therein in the sa*e #ourt of First Instance. 1* Ro*arico alle+ed that he as 0not +iven his da6 in court0 because he as not represented b6 counsel as $tt6s. $lbino and Iu*ul appeared solel6 for Latrina; that althou+h he did not file an anser to the co*plaint, he as not declared in default in the case; that hile $tt6. $lbino received a cop6 of the decision, he and his ife ere never personall6 served a cop6 thereof; that he had nothin+ to do ith the business transactions of Latrina as he did not authori=e her to enter into such transactions; and that the properties levied on e@ecution and sold at public auction b6 the sheriff ere his capital properties and therefore, as to hi*, all the proceedin+s had inthe case ere null and void.On Nove*ber -,, -.)/, the loer court issued an order restrainin+ the Re+ister of Deeds of $n+eles#it6 fro* issuin+ the final bill of sale of Transfer #ertificates of Title Nos. (,.", and (,."- in favor of2uanito Santos and Transfer #ertificates of Title Nos. (,."? and (,."( in favor of Geonardo 2oson until further orders of the court. 15On 2anuar6 ??, -.)., upon *otion of Ro*arico, the court issued a ritof preli*inar6 in>unction en>oinin+ the sheriff fro* approvin+ the final bill of sale of the land covered b6 theafore*entioned certificates of title and the Re+ister of Deeds of $n+eles #it6 fro* re+isterin+ said certificates of title in the na*es of Santos and 2oson until the final outco*e of the case sub>ect to Ro*aricoud+*ent in #ivil #ase No. ???! 0is devoid of le+al or factual basis hich is not even supported b6 a findin+ of fact or ratio decidendi in the bod6 of the decision, and *a6 be declared null and void ... pursuant to a doctrine laid don b6 the Supre*e #ourt to the effect that the #ourt of First Instance or a branch thereof, has authorit6 and >urisdiction to tr6 and decide an action for annul*ent of a final and e@ecutor6 >ud+*ent or order rendered b6 another court of first instance or of a branch thereof 7&ianan vs. I*perial, "" S#R$ )""8.0 18On hether or not the properties lenied upon and sold at public auction *a6 be reconve6ed to Ro*arico, the court, findin+ that there as no basis for holdin+ the con>u+al partnership liable for thepersonal indebtedness of Latrina, ruled in favor of reconve6ance in vie of the >urisprudence that the interest of the ife in the con>u+al partnership propert6 bein+ inchoate and therefore *erel6 an e@pectanc6, the sa*e *a6 not be sold or disposed of for value until after the li9uidation and settle*ent of the co**unit6 assets. The dispositive portion of the decision readsBHF1R1FOR1, and in vie of the fore+oin+, >ud+*ent is hereb6 rendered in favor of the plaintiff and a+ainst all the defendants, as follosB7a8 The Decision of the #ourt of First Instance of Pa*pan+a and $n+eles #it6, :ranch IV, rendered in #ivil #ase No. ???!, entitled 0RI#LI HON&, 1T $G. vs. L$TRIN$ PIN1D$ F1NSON and ROM$RI#O F1NSON0, is hereb6 declared null and void, onl6 as far as it affects plaintiff herein Ro*arico Fenson;7b8 The Hrit of 1@ecution, lev6 in e@ecution and auction sale of the con>u+al propert6 of the spouses Ro*arico Fenson and Latrina Pineda Fenson hich ere sold at public auction on Nove*ber --, -.)), ithout notice to plaintiff herein, b6 Deput6 Sheriff 1*erito Sicat, are liCeise declared null and void and of no force and effect;7c8 Defendants 1*erito Sicat and #onrado Ga+*an, in their official capacit6 as Sheriff and Re+ister of Deeds, respectivel6, are en>oined per*anentl6 fro* issuin+ andAor re+isterin+ the correspondin+ deeds of sale affectin+ the propert6;7d8 The afore*entioned bu6ers are directed to reconve6 the propert6 the6 have thus purchased at public auction to plaintiff Ro*arico Fenson;7e8 $s far as the clai* for rei*burse*ent filed b6 2uanito Santos concernin+ the rede*ption of the propert6 covered b6 Transfer #ertificate of Title No. (,."- fro* theRural :anC of Porac, hich foreclosed the sa*e e@tra>udiciall6, is concerned, plaintiffRo*arico Fenson *a6 redee* the sa*e ithin the period and in the *anner prescribed b6 la, after the correspondin+ deed of rede*ption shall have been re+istered in the Office of the Re+istr6 of Deeds for $n+eles #it6;7f8 Defendants Spouses RicC6 Hon+ and $nita #han are, ith the e@ception of the defendants 2uanito Santos, Geonardo 2oson, Sheriff and Re+ister of Deeds, are ordered >ointl6 and severall6, to pa6 the plaintiff Ro*arico Fenson the su* of P-,,,,,.,,, correspondin+ to the e@penses of liti+ation, ith le+al interest thereon fro* the ti*e this suit as filed up to the ti*e the sa*e shall have been paid, plus P",,,,.,, for and as attorne6ercito, it is clearl6 stated on pa+e ? of the da6oint affidavit e@pressin+ their desire to re*ain ith their father, $ntonio Valde=, herein petitioner.In an order, dated ," Ma6 -..", the trial court *ade the folloin+ clarificationB#onse9uentl6, considerin+ that $rticle -!) of the Fa*il6 #ode e@plicitl6 provides that the propert6 ac9uired b6 both parties durin+ their union, in the absence of proof to the contrar6, are presu*ed to have been obtained throu+h the >oint efforts of the parties and ill be onedb6 the* in e9ual shares, plaintiff and defendant ill own their :famil! home: and all their properties for that *atter in equal shares.In the li9uidation and partition of properties oned in co**on b6 the plaintiff and defendant, the provisions on onership found in the #ivil #ode shall appl6. 3 71*phasis supplied.8In addressin+ specificall6 the issue re+ardin+ the disposition of the fa*il6 dellin+, the trial court saidB#onsiderin+ that this #ourt has alread6 declared the *arria+e beteen petitioner and respondent as null and void ab initio, pursuant to $rt. -!), the propert6 re+i*e of petitioner and respondent shall be +overned b6 the rules on ownership.The provisions of $rticles -,? and -?. of the Fa*il6 #ode finds no application since $rticle -,? refers to the procedure for the li9uidation of the con/ugal partnership propert! and $rticle-?. refers to the procedure for the li9uidation of the absolute communit! of propert!. *Petitioner *oved for a reconsideration of the order. The *otion as denied on (, October -..".In his recourse to this #ourt, petitioner sub*its that $rticles ",, "- and "? of the Fa*il6 #ode shouldbe held controllin+B he ar+ues thatBI$rticle -!) of the Fa*il6 #ode does not appl6 to cases here the parties are ps6cholo+icall6incapacitated.II$rticles ",, "- and "? in relation to $rticles -,? and -?. of the Fa*il6 #ode +overn the disposition of the fa*il6 dellin+ in cases here a *arria+e is declared void ab initio, includin+ a *arria+e declared void b6 reason of the ps6cholo+ical incapacit6 of the spouses.III$ssu*in+ arguendo that $rticle -!) applies to *arria+es declared void ab initio on the +round of the ps6cholo+ical incapacit6 of a spouse, the sa*e *a6 be read consistentl6 ith $rticle -?..IVIt is necessar6 to deter*ine the parent ith ho* *a>orit6 of the children ish to sta6. 5The trial court correctl6 applied the la. In a void marriage, re+ardless of the cause thereof, the propert6 relations of the parties durin+ the period of cohabitation is +overned b6 the provisions of $rticle -!) or $rticle -!/, such as the case *a6 be, of the Fa*il6 #ode. $rticle -!) is a re*aCe of $rticle -!! of the #ivil #ode as interpreted and so applied in previous cases; 6 it providesB$rt. -!). Hhen a *an and a o*an ho are capacitated to *arr6 each other, live e@clusivel6 ith each other as husband and ife ithout the benefit of *arria+e or under a void *arria+e, their a+es and salaries shall be oned b6 the* in e9ual shares and the propert6 ac9uired b6 both of the* throu+h their orC or industr6 shall be +overned b6 the rules on co%onership.In the absence of proof to the contrar6, properties ac9uired hile the6 lived to+ether shall be presu*ed to have been obtained b6 their >oint efforts, orC or industr6, and shall be oned b6 the* in e9ual shares. For purposes of this $rticle, a part6 ho did not participate in the ac9uisition b6 the other part6 of an6 propert6 shall be dee*ed to have contributed >ointl6 in the ac9uisition thereof in the for*eroint efforts. $ part6 ho did not participate in the ac9uisition of the propert6 shall be considered as havin+ contributed thereto >ointl6 if said part6u+al partnership of +ains, the fruits of the coupleoint contribution of *one6, propert6 or industr6 shall be oned in co**on and in proportion to their respective contributions. Such contributions and correspondin+ shares, hoever, are prima facie presu*ed to be e9ual. The share of an6 part6 ho is *arried to another shall accrue to the absolute co**unit6 or con>u+al partnership, as the case *a6 be, if so e@istin+ under a valid *arria+e. If the part6 ho has acted in bad faith is not validl6 *arried to another, his or her share shall be forfeited in the *anner alread6 heretofore e@pressed. 11In decidin+ to taCe further co+ni=ance of the issue on the settle*ent of the parties< co**on propert6,the trial court acted neither i*prudentl6 nor precipitatel6; a court hich has >urisdiction to declare the*arria+e a nullit6 *ust be dee*ed liCeise clothed in authorit6 to resolve incidental and conse9uential *atters. Nor did it co**it a reversible error in rulin+ that petitioner and private respondent on the 0fa*il6 ho*e0 and all their co**on propert6 in equal shares, as ell as in concludin+ that, in the li9uidation and partition of the propert6 oned in co**on b6 the*, the provisions on co%onership under the #ivil #ode, not $rticles ",, "- and "?, in relation to $rticles -,? and -?., 12 of the Fa*il6 #ode, should aptl6 prevail. The rules set up to +overn the li9uidation of either the absolute co**unit6 or the con>u+al partnership of +ains, the propert6 re+i*es reco+ni=ed for valid and voidable *arria+es 7in the latter case until the contract is annulled8, are irrelevant to the li9uidation of the co%onership that e@ists beteen co**on%la spouses. The first para+raph of $rticles ", of the Fa*il6 #ode, appl6in+ para+raphs 7?8, 7(8, 7!8 and ."8 of $rticle !(, 13 relates onl6, b6 its e@plicit ter*s, to voidable *arria+es and, e@ceptionall6, to void *arria+es under $rticle !,1* of the #ode, i.e., the declaration of nullit6 of a subse9uent *arria+e contracted b6 a spouse of a prior void *arria+e before the latter is >udiciall6 declared void. The latter is a special rule that so*eho reco+ni=es the philosoph6 and an old doctrine that void *arria+es are ine@istent fro* the ver6 be+innin+ and no >udicial decree is necessar6 to establish their nullit6. In no re9uirin+ for purposes of remarriage, the declaration of nullit6 b6 final >ud+*ent of the previousl6 contracted void *arria+e, the present la ai*s to do aa6 ith an6 continuin+ uncertaint6 on the status of the second *arria+e. It is not then illo+ical for the provisions of $rticle !(, in relation to $rticles !- 15 and !?, 16 of the Fa*il6 #ode, on the effects of the ter*ination of a subse9uent *arria+e contracted durin+ the subsistence of a previous *arria+e to be *ade applicablepro hac vice. In all other cases, it is not to be assu*ed that the la has also *eant to have coincident propert6 relations, on the one hand, beteen spouses in valid and voidable *arria+es 7before annul*ent8and, on the other, beteen co**on%la spouses or spouses of void *arria+es, leavin+ to ordain, on the latter case, the ordinar6 rules on co%onership sub>ect to the provisions of the Fa*il6 #ode on the 0fa*il6 ho*e,0 i.e., the provisions found in Title V, #hapter ?, of the Fa*il6 #ode, re*ain in force and effect re+ardless of the propert6 re+i*e of the spouses.HF1R1FOR1, the 9uestioned orders, dated ," Ma6 -.." and (, October -..", of the trial court are $FFIRM1D. No costs.&adilla" Kapunan and ;ermosisima" .r." ..." concur.Bellosillo" .." is on leave.TFIRD DIVISIONLG.R. No. 1115*). !a0uary 2), 199)MSPS. TRN'#'S. ESTONN#a01P#ULNOESTONN#, petitioners,(s. COURT OF #PPE#LS, SPS. CELSO#T#K#Na01 NL'#"C.#N a01 CONSUELO $'#. 'E G#RC#, REME'OS, EL$R#,OFEL#, $RGLO, M#RLOU, a01 LOLT# a55 (ur0a9e1G#RC#, a01"ERSOFC#STORG#RC#a01o8 S#NT#GOG#RC#, !R., respondents.R 1 S O G 3 T I O NFR#NCSCO, J.;Theinstantcontrovers6 involves Got# ofthea*endedplanPsu%??./($*d., situated in :arrio Santisi*a #ru=, Sta. #ru=, Ga+una ith an area of?)( s9uare *eters. The said parcel of land as covered b6 Transfer#ertificate of Title No. T%-.-)" issued in the na*e of Santia+o &arcia hodied on October ?, -.'). So*e si@ 6ears after Santia+o &arciaS(06"(" the lon! established doctrine that the trial court's findin!s especially as to the credibility of the *itnesses should be respected#.The Court of 6ppeals/ in issuin! the 7uestioned decision/ solely centered on the natureof the property in 7uestion/ and conveniently brushed aside the follo*in! le!al issues raised on appeal +thereby leadin! to an erroneous 2ud!'ent./ to *itB+a. That the plaintiffs$appellants +Sps# 6tayan and no* private respondents. have no cause of action and,or lacC cause of action a!ainst (stoninas +no* petitioners.# 6ssu'in!/ arguendo that they have/ the sa'e is no* barred by laches# The sa'e is true *ith the appellants 0arcias +no* also private respondents.# :ence/ the title of (stonina should have been declared valid#+b. That the plaintiffs$appellants +Sps# 6tayan and no* private respondents. are not parties to Civil Case No# @@83- *here the *rit of attach'ent *as issued and *hich resulted in the execution pendin! appeal# :ence/ they cannot attacC the validity of the execution in this proceedin!s especially so *hen 2ud!'ent therein had already attained finality#.Conse7uently/ by virtue of the fore!oin! errors/ the Court of 6ppeals erred in not !rantin! herein petitioners' prayer that the trial court's findin!s be 'odified by upholdin! (stonina's title to the property under TCT No# T$%%%&1/ and affir'in! in allother respect the order of the trial court#4@5Thesettledruleisthat thefactual findin+s, of theappellatecourt aredee*ed conclusive.D.E Thus, the >urisdiction of this #ourt in cases brou+ht to itfro* the#ourtof $ppeals is+enerall6 li*itedto therevieand revision oferrors of la alle+edl6 co**itted b6 the appellate court. $s such, this #ourt is+enerall6not dut6%boundtoanal6=eand ei+hallover a+ain the evidencealread6consideredintheproceedin+sbelo. D-,E Thisis, hoever,sub>ect toseveral e@ceptions, oneof hichishenthereisaconflict beteenthefactual findin+sof the#ourt of$ppealsandthetrial court, asinthiscase,arrantin+ a revie b6 this #ourt of such factual findin+s. D--EIn concludin+ that the parcel of land in 9uestion as the con>u+al propert6of Santia+o and #onsuelo &arcia, the trial court relied solel6 on the fact thathen T#T No. T%-.-)" coverin+ the said land as issued, Santia+o &arciaas alread6 *arried to #onsuelo &arcia, thus +ivin+ rise to the presu*ptionthat the sa*e as indeed con>u+al. It found the testi*on6 of #onsuelo &arciathat thesaidpropert6asinheritedb6Santia+o&arciafro*hisdeceased*other to be self%servin+ and co*pletel6 disre+arded the said testi*on6. $ndas re+ards the inscription at the bacC of the T#T No. T%-.-)" thatB"4t5he property described in this title is sub2ect to the clai's of the heirs of the deceased (u!enia Cle'ente/ *ithin t*o +2. years fro' 1anuary 27/ 1%&1/ in accordance *ith the provision of Section 8/ ule 78 of the ules of Court"/ 4125the trialcourt held that 0there is no shoin+ at allfro* said inscription thatsaid propert6 ca*e fro* the parents of Santia+o &arcia0. D-(EOn the other hand, the #ourt of $ppeals in taCin+ the stance that the saidlandasthee@clusivepropert6of Santia+o&arcia, +avecredencetotheunrebuttedtesti*on6of #onsuelo&arciathat thesaidparcel of landasinheritedb6Santia+o&arciafro*hisdeceased*other1u+enia#le*enteandthatitusedtobepartofabi+ tractofland hichasdivideda*on+Santia+o and his sisters.The evidence on record as ell as established >urisprudence on the *atterlead us to concur ith the findin+ of the #ourt of $ppeals that the propert6involvedinthisdisputeisindeedthee@clusivepropert6of thedeceasedSantia+o &arcia. It has been repeatedl6 held b6 this #ourt that thepresu*ptionunder $rticle-',of the#ivil #odethat all propert6 of the*arria+e belon+ to the con>u+al partnership applies onl6 hen there is proofthat the propert6 as ac9uired durin+ the *arria+e. Otherise stated, proof ofac9uisition durin+ the *arria+e is a condition sine qua non for the operation ofthe presu*ption in favor of the con>u+al partnership. D-!E In the case at bench,thepetitionershavebeenunabletopresent an6proof that thepropert6in9uestion as ac9uired durin+ the *arria+e of Santia+o and #onsuelo. The6anchor their clai*solel6onthefact that henthetitleover thelandin9uestion as issued, Santia+o as alread6 *arried to #onsuelo as evidencedb6there+istrationinthena*eof 0Santia+o&arcia*arriedto#onsuelo&a=a0. This, accordin+tothespouses1stonina, sufficestoestablishthecon>u+al nature of the propert6. The fore+oin+ contention has no *erit. In thecase of 2ocson v. #ourt of $ppeals D-"E e held thatB"The certificates of title/ ho*ever/ upon *hich petitioner rests his clai' is insufficient#The fact that the properties *ere re!istered in the na'e of '('ilio 1ocson/ 'arried to 6le2andra )oblete' is no proof that the properties *ere ac7uired durin! the spouses' coverture# 6c7uisition of title and re!istration thereof are t*o different acts# >t is *ell settled that re!istration does not confer title but 'erely confir's one already existin! x x x# >t 'ay be that the properties under dispute *ere ac7uired by ('ilio 1ocson *hen he *as still a bachelor but *ere re!istered only after his 'arria!e to 6le2andra )oblete/ *hich explains *hy he *as described in the certificates of title as 'arried to the latter#"Contrary to petitioner's position/ the certificates of title sho*/ on their face/ that the properties *ere exclusively ('ilio 1ocson's/ the re!istered o*ner# This is so because the *ords ''arried to' precedin! '6le2andra )oblete' are 'erely descriptive of the civil status of ('ilio 1ocson x x x# >n other *ords/ the i'port fro' the certificates of title isthat ('ilio 1ocson is the o*ner of the properties/ the sa'e havin! been re!istered in his na'e alone/ and that he is 'arried to 6le2andra )oblete#" 41&5:ein+ the e@clusive propert6 of Santia+o &arcia, it as the entire parcel ofland in 9uestion that for*ed part of his estate and hich passed to his tenheirs b6 co*pulsor6 succession upon his death. $nd as correctl6 held b6 the#ourt of $ppeals, hat could therefore be attached and sold at public auctionin #ivil#aseNo.//!(, as onl6theone%tenth7-A-,8 proindiviso share of#onsuelo &arcia in the said parcel of land. The sale at public auction of thedisputed propert6 in its entiret6 b6 the Sheriff in favor of Trinidad 1stonina overandabovetheone%tenth7-A-,8shareof #onsuelo&arciaisnull andvoid,belon+in+asit doestotheotherheirsof Santia+o&arciaandlatertothespouses $ta6an. Horth reiteratin+ is the basic precept that the poer of thecourt in the e@ecution of >ud+*ents e@tends onl6 over propertiesun9uestionabl6 belon+in+ to the >ud+*ent debtor. The lev6 b6 the sheriff of apropert6 b6 virtue of a rit of attach*ent *a6 be considered as *ade underthe authorit6 of the court onl6 hen the propert6 levied upon belon+s to thedefendant. D-)E For, as the sa6in+ +oes, one *anect the recover6 of onership or possession of the propert6 sei=ed b6the sheriff, as ell as da*a+es resultin+ fro* the alle+edl6 ron+ful sei=ureanddetentionthereof despitethethirdpart6clai*andit *a6bebrou+hta+ainst the sheriff and such other parties as *a6 be alle+ed to have colludedithhi*inthesupposedl6ron+ful e@ecutionproceedin+s, suchasthe>ud+*ent creditor hi*self. Such 0proper action0, as above pointed out, is andshould be an entirel6 separate and distinct action fro* that in hich e@ecutionhas issued, if instituted b6 a stran+er to the latter suit. D?,EIn the case at bench, the filin+ b6 the spouses $ta6an of an independentaction ith the court other than the one hich issued the rit of e@ecution isproper as the6 ere stran+ers to #ivil #ase No. //!(,. Such an independentaction cannot be considered as an encroach*ent upon the >urisdiction of a co%e9ualand coordinate court. D?-E Hhile it is true that propert6 in custod6 of thela *a6 not be interfered ith, ithout the per*ission of the proper court, thisrule is confined to cases here the propert6 belon+s to the defendant or onein hich the defendant has proprietar6 interests. :ut hen the Sheriff, actin+be6ond the bounds of his office sei=es a stran+er