Heirs of Candelaria DIGEST
Heirs of Candelaria DIGEST
FACTS:
APPELLANT'S ALLEGATIONS:
HELD:
1. IMPLIED TRUST
Where property is taken by a person under an
agreement to hold it for, or convey it to another or the
grantor, a resulting or implied trust arises in favor of the
person for whose benefit the property was intended.
This rule, which has been incorporated in the new Civil
Code in Art. 1453 thereof, is founded upon equity.
An implied trust arises where a person purchases land
with his own money and takes a conveyance thereof in
the name of another. In such a case, the property is
held on a resulting trust in favor of the one furnishing
the consideration for the transfer, unless a different
intention or understanding appears. The trust which
results under such circumstances does not arise from
contract or agreement of the parties, but from the facts
and circumstances, that is to say, it results because of
equity and arises by implication or operation of law.
In the present case, the complaint expressly alleges
that although Lucas had no more interest over the lot,
the subsequent payments made by Emilio until fully
paid were made in the name of Lucas, with the
understanding that the necessary documents of
transfer will be made later, the reason that the
transaction being brother to brother."
From this allegation, it is apparent that Emilio who
furnished the consideration, intended to obtain a
beneficial interest in the property in question. Having
supplied the purchase money, it may naturally be
presumed that he intended the purchase for his own
benefit. Indeed, it is evident from the allegation in the
complaint that the property in question was acquired by
Lucas Candelaria under circumstances which show it
was conveyed to him on the faith of his intention to
hold it for, or convey it to the grantor, the plaintiff's
predecessor in interest.
2. NO LACHES IN THIS CASE
Constructive or implied trusts may be barred by lapse of
time. The rule in such trusts is that laches constitutes a
bar to actions to enforce the trust, and repudiation is
not required, unless there is a concealment of the facts
giving rise to the trust.
Continuous recognition of a resulting trust, however,
precludes any defense of laches in a suit to declare and
enforce the trust.
The beneficiary of a resulting trust may, therefore,
without prejudice to his right to enforce the trust, prefer
the trust to persist and demand no conveyance from
the trustee.
It being alleged in the complaint that Lucas held the
title to the lot in question merely in trust for Emilio and
that this fact was acknowledged not only by him but
also by his heirs, herein defendants which allegation
is hypothetically admitted plaintiff's action is NOT
barred by lapse of time. On the contrary, the interest of
justice would be better served if plaintiff -appellant and
her alleged co-heirs were to be given an opportunity to
be heard and allowed to present proof in support of
their claim.
DISPOSITION: Order of dismissal appealed from is
hereby reversed and the case remanded to the court a
quo for further proceedings.