recovery of ownership

Article 1409 of the Civil Code states:

“Art. 1409. The following contracts are inexistent and void from the beginning:

xxx xxx xxx
(2) Those which are absolutely simulated or fictitious;
xxx xxx xxx”

On the other hand, Article 1410 of the Civil Code provides:

“Art. 1410. The action or defense for the declaration of the inexistence of a contract does not prescribe.”

If the signature of your father was forged in the Deed of Sale, then the said Deed is indeed simulated or fictitious, hence, a void contract under Article 1409, par. (2). Since it is a void contract, the legal action to declare the said contract as null and void does not prescribe pursuant to Article 1410.

Even if a new title has already been issued in the name of the person who caused the forgery, the action remains imprescriptible.

What if the property was sold by the forger to another person? The general rule is that the subsequent sale is likewise null and void. This is because of the well-settled principle that no one can give what one does not have. One can sell only what one owns or is authorized to sell, and the buyer can acquire no more right than what the seller can transfer legally. However, there is an exception to this rule, i.e., an innocent purchaser for value. An innocent purchaser for value is one who buys the property of another WITHOUT notice that some other person has a right to or interest in it, and who pays a FULL AND FAIR PRICE at the time of the purchase or before receiving any notice of another person’s claim. The burden of proving the status of a purchaser in good faith and for value lies upon one who asserts that status. This onus probandi cannot be discharged by mere invocation of the ordinary presumption of good faith.

In your case, you mentioned that the mortgage already prescribed. Therefore, the Bank/PDIC could no longer foreclose the mortgage of the property due to prescription. Therefore, the title of the property is still in the name of the person who forged the signature of your father. If the Bank/PDIC decides to file a case against the said mortgagor, it will not be a case to foreclose the mortgage but only a case to recover sum of money. But the Bank/PDIC can thereafter attach the subject property, which will eventually be sold to the highest bidder at a public auction, and the proceeds of the sale will answer for the obligation of the mortgagor.

Also, the fact that your cause of action is imprescriptible does not mean that you can file as many cases as you want in perpetuity. Your subsequent legal action to recover the property may be barred by the principle of “res judicata” or “barred by prior judgment”. For res judicata to apply, the following are the requisites:

(1) There is a former judgment that has become final;
(2) The court that rendered it had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties;
(3) It is a judgment on the merits; and
(4) There is — between the first and the second actions — an identity of parties, subject matter and cause of action.”

If the four (4) requisites are present, your subsequent legal action will be barred by res judicata.

It is a good thing that you mentioned that your civil case was dismissed on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. If the dismissal was due to lack of jurisdiction and the court where you filed the case indeed had no jurisdiction, then res judicata may not yet apply.

Let us say that the court which dismissed your complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction made a mistake in the sense that it really has jurisdiction, then you have a problem. In such case, your remedy was indeed to file a Motion for Reconsideration or appeal to a higher court.

Your case is somewhat complicated and I suggest that you personally consult a lawyer and furnish him the entire records of the previous case. This will enable the lawyer to study your case better and explore all possible legal options.