Dagupan Trading vs.

Macam
FACTS:
Sammy Maron and his seven brothers and sisters were pro-indiviso owners of a par
cel of unregistered land located in barrio Parayao, Binmaley, Pangasinan. In 195
5, while their application for registration of said land under Act No. 496 was p
ending, they executed, on June 19 and on September 21, two deeds of sale conveyi
ng the property to herein respondent Rustico Macam who thereafter took possessio
n of the property and made substantial improvements upon it. On October 14, 1955
, OCT No. 6942 covering the land was issued in the name of the Marons, free from
all liens and encumbrances.
On August 4, 1956, however, by virtue of a final judgment of the Municipal Court
of Manila in a civil case in favor of Manila Trading and Supply Co. (Manila Tra
ding) against Sammy Maron, levy was made upon whatever interest he had in the su
bject property. Thereafter, said interest was sold at public auction to the judg
ment creditor Manila Trading. The corresponding notice of levy, certificate of s
ale and the sheriff's certificate of final sale in favor of Manila Trading - bec
ause nobody exercised the right of redemption - were duly registered, and on Mar
ch 1, 1958, the latter sold all its rights and title in the property to herein p
etitioner Dagupan Trading Company (Dagupan Trading).
On September 4, 1958, Dagupan Trading filed an action against Macam, praying tha
t it be declared owner of one-eighth portion of the subject property. The CFI of
Pangasinan dismissed the said complaint, and the Court of Appeals affirmed its
decision.
ISSUE:
Who has the superior right over the one-eight portion of the subject property?
COURT RULING:
The Supreme Court likewise affirmed both decisions of the lower courts. At the t
ime of the levy, Sammy Maron already had no interest on the one-eight portion of
the property he and his siblings have inherited because for a considerable time
prior to the levy, said interest had already been conveyed upon Macam "fully an
d irretrievably" - as the Court of Appeals held. Consequently, the subsequent le
vy made on the property for the purpose of satisfying the judgment rendered agai
nst Sammy Maron in favor of the Manila Trading Company was void and of no effect
.
The unregistered sale and the consequent conveyance of title and ownership in fa
vor Macam could not have been cancelled and rendered of no effect upon the subse
quent issuance of the Torrens title over the entire parcel of land. Moreover, up
on the execution of the deed of sale in his favor by Sammy Maron, Macam had imme
diately taken possession of the land conveyed as its new owner and introduced co
nsiderable improvements upon it himself. To deprive him, therefore, of the same
by sheer force of technicality would be against both justice and equity.