Case Digest (G.R. No. 97761)
Facts:
On January 14, 1983, Ricardo Ramos filed a complaint for recovery of property against Agueda de Vera, Mario de la Cruz, Evangeline dela Cruz, and Edronel de la Cruz before the Regional Trial Court of Cauayan, Isabela, alleging that defendants occupied portions of his titled land; an amended complaint was filed June 29, 1983. A court commissioner conducted a relocation survey (report filed April 30, 1984) identifying Portions “A,” “B,” and “C”; the trial court approved the report and on August 2, 1988 rendered judgment ordering ejectment, removal of improvements, rents, attorney’s fees and costs; the Court of Appeals modified to dismiss plaintiff’s claim as to Portion “A” but affirmed in other respects, and the petitioners sought review before the Supreme Court.Issues:
- Can the doctrine of laches defeat Ricardo Ramos’s title and right to recover Portions “B” and “C”?
- Were the petitioners possessors and builders in bad faith, making them liable to the owner for demolition, ren
Case Digest (G.R. No. 97761)
Facts:
- Parties and procedural posture
- Agueda De Vera, Mario De La Cruz, Evangeline Dela Cruz, and Edronel De La Cruz, Petitioners were defendants below.
- Hon. Court of Appeals, and Ricardo Ramos, Respondents were the appellee and intervening respondent respectively in the appellate and supreme proceedings.
- The case originated as Civil Case No. Br. II-1861 in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 19, Cauayan, Isabela, presided by Judge Artemio R. Alivia.
- Original complaint and amended complaint
- On January 14, 1983, Ricardo Ramos filed a Complaint for recovery of property with damages.
- On June 29, 1983, an Amended Complaint alleged Ramos was owner of Lot 2, H-4-617 evidenced by Original Certificate of Title No. P-5619 and that defendants occupied a triangular portion of the property of twenty-two (22) square meters where they constructed a house of strong and permanent materials in 1983 after removing a light-materials building in January or February 1970.
- The Amended Complaint alleged Ramos demanded removal and vacation of the improvement but the defendants refused.
- Defendants' Answer and defenses
- Petitioners asserted possession of not only twenty-two (22) but seventy (70) square meters by virtue of possession through their predecessor-in-interest, Teodoro de la Cruz, and thereafter by themselves as owners before 1956.
- Petitioners alleged their predecessor had a pending Miscellaneous Sales Application favorably recommended by the District Land Officer, declared the land for taxation, and that Ramos’s cause of action was barred by prescription and/or laches.
- Appointment of Commissioner and relocation survey
- At pre-trial on November 15, 1983, the parties agreed and the trial court appointed the Chief of the Survey Party of the Bureau of Lands in Cauayan as Court Commissioner to conduct a relocation survey and report whether the disputed area formed part of Ramos’s property.
- On April 30, 1984, the Commissioner submitted a Relocation Survey Plan No. 2-02-000160 and Report finding:
- A twenty-two (22) square meter area designated Lot 9841-A, Psd-2-02-013907 representing land covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-133705 of Ricardo Ramos.
- Portion “A” of fifty-one (51) square meters as part of Lot 7005, Cad. 211 claimed by the defendants.
- Portion “B” of five (5) square meters and Portion “C” of eighteen (18) square meters as parts of Lot 9841-B occupied by defendants.
- A gap existed between Lot 9841-A and the sixty-meter National Road-right-of-way, implying an erroneous boundary in Ramos’s TCT.
- Objections, court approval of report, and trial court decision
- On October 24, 1984, Ricardo Ramos filed Opposition to the Commissioner’s Report alleging errors.
- On March 4, 1985, the trial court overruled Ramos’s objections and approved the Commissioner’s Report, noting plaintiff had full opportunity to demonstrate error and offered only the subdivision blueprint in rebuttal.
- After trial on the merits, on August 2, 1988, the trial court rendered judgment:
- Declaring plaintiff owner of all lands adjoining Lot 9841-A west up to the National Road and ordering defendants to vacate and deliver possession.
- Ordering defendants to remove improvements at their expense within thirty (30) days from finality.
- Ordering defendants to pay monthly rents of P273.70 from April 27, 1981 and an additional P724.70 per month from receipt of decision until possession was delivered.
- Ordering defendants jointly and severally to pay P5,000 as attorney’s fees and costs.
- Court of Appeals disposition and Supreme Court petition
- On March 21, 1991, the Court of Appeals modified the trial court decision by dismissing plaintiff-appellee’s complaint as to Portion “A,” deleting monthly rents decreed for that portion, and affirming the decision in all other respects.
- Petitioners filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 to the Supreme Court, challenging, inter...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary issue presented for review
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in adjudging petitioners as possessors and builders in bad faith of Portions “B” and “C” and in affirming the trial court’s decree requiring vacation, demolition or removal of improvements, and payment of rents, attorney’s fees, and costs.
- Subsidiary legal issues argued by petitioners
- Whether laches barred Ramos’s recovery of Portions “B” and “C.”
- Whether petitioners ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)