Atilano v Atilano, May 21, 1969, MAKALINTAL, J.

Eulogio Atilano I (Atilano I) bought a piece of lot in Zamboanga. He later had it subdivided into 5
parts (A-E). He sold lots B,C,D to others and lot E to his brother, Eulogio Atilano II (Atilano II). He
retained lot A.

Later on Atilano II discovered he was in possession of Lot A (in the deed) and not Lot E. He
demanded exchange of the lots from then occupant and heir of Atilano II, Ladislao Atilano. Ladislao
refused since lot E has an area of 2,612 sqm, as compared to the 1,808 sqm of lot A.

Issue: WN the exchange should be effected- NO.

1. When one sells or buys real property a piece of land, for example one sells or buys the
property as he sees it, in its actual setting and by its physical metes and bounds, and not by the
mere lot number assigned to it in the certificate of title.

2. The acts of the parties show that the sale of lot A (and not lot E) to Atilano II was the intent of the
parties.

a. Lo A was already in the possession of the buyer, Atilano II, who had constructed his
residence therein, even before the sale in his favor and even before the subdivision of the
entire lot

b. Atilano II had his house on the portion correctly identified, after the subdivision, as lot E,
even adding to the area thereof by purchasing a portion of an adjoining property belonging to
a different owner.

The two brothers continued in possession of the respective portions the rest of their lives, obviously
ignorant of the initial mistake in the designation of the lot subject of the 1920 until 1959, when the
mistake was discovered for the first time.

3. Its designation as lot E in the deed of sale was simple mistake in the drafting of the document.
The mistake did not vitiate the consent of the parties, or affect the validity and binding effect of the
contract between them.

Remedy: the deed of sale executed in 1920 need no longer reformed. The parties have retained
possession of their respective properties conformably to the real intention of the parties to that sale,
and all they should do is to execute mutual deeds of conveyance.