David, Josemaria Alfonso S.

- 184065

Bravo-Guerrero v. Bravo
G.R. No. 152658; July 29, 2005
Topic: Simulated contracts
Facts:
Sps Bravo owned two parcels of land located in Makati City. They have three children namely,
Rolando, Cesar and Lily. Rolando was married and have 6 children namely namely Elizabeth, Edward,
Roland Jr, Senia, Benjamin, and their half-sister, Ofelia. Cesar died and Lily was married and bore a child
named David Jr.. Simona Bravo, the mother of Rolando, Cesar and Lily, issued a General Power of Attorney
to Mauricio as her atty. In fact. It authorized him to "mortgage or otherwise hypothecate, sell, assign and
dispose of any and all of my property, real, personal or mixed, of any kind whatsoever and wheresoever
situated, or any interest therein xxx.". The later however, mortgage the said properties to PNB and DBP for
10,000 and 5,000 php respectively. On October 1970, Mauricio executed a Deed of Sale with Assumption
of Real Estate Mortgage "Deed of Sale" conveying the Properties to Roland A. Bravo, Ofelia A. Bravo and
Elizabeth Bravo. Later on, Edward, represented by his wife, Fatima Bravo, filed an action for the judicial
partition of the Properties after the death of their grandmother, Simona in 1977. Edward claimed that he as
well as the other grandchildren are co-owners by succession. Despite the refusal of the heirs of awarding
Edward partition of the fruits of the properties to which he filed a complaint to annul sale because it was
due to a simulated contract (between Mauricio and sps Roland Bravo) which prejudiced the heirs. Hence,
this petition
Issue:
Whether or not there was a simulated contract and grossly inadequate price of sale
Ruling:
The Supreme Court held NO, there was no simulated contract and grossly inadequate price of sale
to declare the contract void. According to the Supreme Court, the two subject matters are different principles
and not to be taken as one. There is a simulated contract when parties to an alleged contract do not really
intend to be bound by it which the contract is void. However, when there is a grossly inadequate price for
sale, citing the Supreme court, has a “body a true agreement between the parties. A contract of sale is a
consensual contract, which becomes valid and binding upon the meeting of minds of the parties on the price
and the object of the sale”. Thus, it does not mean that there is a simulated contract in the presence of an
inadequate consideration. In the present case, it is alleged that the parcels of land were sold for 1,000 php
as consideration but additional to which were the assumption of by the vendees to the loan amounting to a
total of 15,000 php. More so, there were no sufficient evidence that such amount was not agreed by the
parties involved in the contract. Thus, there was no evidence to prove such irregularities took place. It
further stated that, “it is not the act of payment of price that determines the validity of a contract of sale.
Payment of the price has nothing to do with the perfection of the contract”.
Dispositive:
WHEREFORE, we REVERSE the Decision of 21 December 2001 of the Court of Appeals in CA-
G.R. CV No. 67794. We REINSTATE the Decision of 11 May 2000 of the Regional Trial Court of Makati,
Branch No. 139, in Civil Case No. 97-137, declaring VALID the Deed of Sale with Assumption of
Mortgage dated 28 October 1970, with the following MODIFICATIONS:
1. We GRANT judicial partition of the subject Properties in the following manner:
a. Petitioner LILY ELIZABETH BRAVO-GUERRERO is entitled to one-third (1/3) of the
Properties;
b. Petitioner OFELIA BRAVO-QUIESTAS is entitled to one-third (1/3) of the Properties; and
c. The remaining one-third (1/3) portion of the Properties should be divided equally between the
children of ROLAND BRAVO.
2. The other heirs of ROLAND BRAVO must reimburse ROLAND BRAVO, JR. for whatever expenses
the latter incurred in paying for and securing the release of the mortgage on the Properties. SO ORDERED.