Professional Documents
Culture Documents
G.R. No. 176492 Digest
G.R. No. 176492 Digest
176492 October 20, 2014 Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal
Circuit
MARIETTA N. BARRIDO, Petitioner,
vs. Trial Courts shall exercise:
LEONARDO V. NONATO, Respondent.
xxxx
DECISION
(3) Exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which involve
PERALTA, J.: title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein
where the assessed value of the propertyor interest therein
Facts does not exceed Twenty thousand pesos (20,000.00)or, in civil
actions in Metro Manila, where such assessed value does not
In the course of the marriage of respondent Leonardo V. exceed Fifty thousand pesos (50,000.00) exclusive of interest,
Nonato and petitioner Marietta N. Barrido, they were able to damages of whatever kind, attorney's fees, litigation expenses
acquire a property situated in Eroreco, Bacolod City, consisting and costs: Provided, That value of such property shall be
of a house and lot, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) determined by the assessed value of the adjacent lots. (as
No. T-140361. On March 15, 1996, their marriage was declared amended by R.A. No. 7691)9
void on the ground of psychological incapacity. Since there was
no more reason to maintain their co-ownership over the Here, the subject propertys assessed value was merely
property, Nonato asked Barrido for partition, but the latter 8,080.00, an amount which certainly does not exceed the
refused. Thus, on January 29, 2003, Nonato filed a Complaint required limit of 20,000.00 for civil actions outside Metro
for partition before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) Manila tofall within the jurisdiction of the MTCC.
of Bacolod City, Branch 3. Therefore, the lower court correctly took cognizance of the
instant case.
Barrido claimed, by way of affirmative defense, that the subject
property had already been sold to their children, Joseph The records reveal that Nonato and Barridos marriage had
Raymund and Joseph Leo. She likewise moved for the dismissal been declared void for psychological incapacity under Article
of the complaint because the MTCC lacked jurisdiction, the 3610 of the Family Code. During their marriage, however, the
partition case being an action incapable of pecuniary conjugal partnership regime governed their property relations.
estimation. Although Article 12911 provides for the procedure in case of
dissolution of the conjugal partnership regime, Article 147
Bacolod MTCC specifically covers the effects of void marriages on the spouses
property relations. Article 147 reads:
Here, the former spouses both agree that they acquired the
subject property during the subsistence of their marriage. Thus,
it shall be presumed to have been obtained by their joint
efforts, work or industry, and shall be jointly owned by them in
equal shares. Barrido, however, claims that the ownership over
the property in question is already vested on their children, by
virtue of a Deed of Sale. But aside from the title to the property
still being registered in the names of the former spouses, said
document of safe does not bear a notarization of a notary
public. It must be noted that without the notarial seal, a
document remains to be private and cannot be converted into
a public document,21 making it inadmissible in evidence unless
properly authenticated.22 Unfortunately, Barrido failed to prove
its due execution and authenticity. In fact, she merely annexed
said Deed of Sale to her position paper. Therefore, the subject
property remains to be owned in common by Nonato and
Barrido, which should be divided in accordance with the rules
on co-ownership.
SO ORDERED.