Ricardo Chu, Jr. v. Melania Caparas

Summary

This case involved a property dispute over a 26,151 square meter parcel of land in Cavite. Petitioners claimed ownership through purchase from Miguela Reyes, alleging the property was erroneously included in consolidated parcels sold by Caparas to respondent spouses Perez. The Supreme Court affirmed lower courts' dismissal of the reconveyance action, finding that petitioners actually purchased a different lot (Lot No. 3) from the disputed property (Lot No. 1) based on the same survey plan they relied upon. The Court emphasized this was a factual dispute inappropriate for Rule 45 review, and that petitioners were not good faith purchasers since respondents had prior registered title and possession. The decision demonstrates the importance of careful property identification in real estate transactions and the limits of appellate review of factual findings.