Agustin Asencio v. Roman Bautista

Summary

This 1917 Supreme Court En Banc case involved a property ownership dispute where the original owner Bautista sold land to Baladjay who failed to pay, prompting reconveyance back to Bautista. Subsequently, Baladjay conveyed the same property to Asencio. The lower court ruled for Asencio, but the Supreme Court reversed, applying Article 1473 of the Civil Code. The Court held that since none of the deeds were registered and Bautista had secured reconveyance and remained in possession before Asencio's deed, Bautista retained ownership. The decision established that recitals of payment in deeds are not conclusive and can be contradicted by overwhelming contrary evidence. This case demonstrates the importance of possession and chronology of transactions in determining property ownership when dealing with unregistered deeds.