AYSON-SIMON VS. ADAMOS 131 SCRA 439

FACTS:

On December 13, 1943, Nicolas Adamos and Vicente Feria defendants-appellants herein purchased two lots from Juan Porciuncula. Porciuncula’s successor in interest sought for the annulment and cancellation of the sale which the court a quo favorably ruled.

In the meantime during the pendency of the above mentioned case, defendants-appellants sold to Generosa Ayson Simon the lots in question. Due to the failure of defendants appellants to comply with their commitment to have the subdivision plan  of the lots approved and to deliver to deliver the  titles and possession to Generosa, the latter filed suit for specific performance. As a result of the sale of the lot to said defendants sppellants being null and void, there is impossibity that they can comply with  their commitment to Generosa, the latter then seek the rescission of the contract plus damages.

The defendants-appellants  contend that Generosa’s action had prescribed, considering that she had only four years from May 29, 1946 to rescind the transaction.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the action to rescind the obligation has prescribed.

HELD:

Article 1191 of the Civil Code provides that an injured party may also seek rescission  if the fulfillment should have become impossible. The cause of action to claim rescission arises when the fulfillment of the obligation became imppossible when the court declared that the sale was null and void. The Generosa cannot be assailed on the  ground that she slept on her rights.