Title
Evangelista vs. Alto Surety and Insurance Co., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. L-11139
Decision Date
Apr 23, 1958
A dispute over ownership of a house built on leased land, deemed immovable property, with conflicting claims from attachment and auction sales.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-11139)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Initiation and levy
    • June 4, 1949: Santos Evangelista filed Civil Case No. 8235 against Ricardo Rivera for a sum of money and secured a writ of attachment.
    • June 8, 1949: The sheriff levied the attachment on a house built by Rivera on leased land by filing a copy of the writ and notice with the Register of Deeds of Manila.
  • Evangelista’s execution sale and title
    • Trial court rendered judgment in favor of Evangelista; on October 8, 1951, he purchased the attached house at a public auction under writ of execution.
    • October 22, 1952: He received the definite deed of sale upon expiration of the redemption period.
  • Respondent’s competing claim
    • In Civil Case No. 6268 (“Alto Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. vs. Quiambao, Guevara, Rivera”), respondent obtained judgment and sold the same house at auction on September 29, 1950.
    • May 10, 1952: Respondent received a definite deed of sale as highest bidder; Rivera refused to surrender possession to Evangelista, asserting respondent’s superior title.
  • Lower court proceedings
    • June 13, 1953: Evangelista filed an action against respondent and Rivera to establish his title to the house, secure possession, and recover damages.
    • The Court of First Instance of Manila awarded Evangelista delivery of the house and forty pesos per month damages from October 1952; respondent appealed.
    • The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the house was “personal property,” Evangelista’s attachment improperly levied, and respondent’s sale gave it priority.

Issues:

  • Classification of the house for attachment purposes
    • Is a house permanently erected by a lessee on leased land to be treated as immovable or as personal property for attachment?
  • Validity and priority of Evangelista’s attachment
    • Did Evangelista’s levy—by filing the writ and notice with the Register of Deeds—create a preferential lien over respondent’s subsequent sale and deed?
    • Was service of the attachment writ and notice on Ricardo Rivera properly effected?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.