Case Digest (G.R. No. 120615)
Facts:
This is Heirs of Manuel T. Suico v. Court of Appeals, Marlyn A. Reyes and Julie Duran, G.R. No. 120615, January 21, 1997, decided by the Supreme Court Third Division, Davide, Jr., J., writing for the Court. The petition sought review of the Court of Appeals decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 31456 that annulled the decisions of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 24, Cebu (Civil Case No. CEB-13798) and of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of Cebu City, Branch 8 (Civil Case No. R-31419), on the ground that the MTCC had acted without jurisdiction.The petitioners are the Heirs of Manuel T. Suico (lessors). The respondents are the Court of Appeals (as an appellee in the administrative posture of review) and private respondents Marlyn A. Reyes and Julie Duran (lessees/defendants in the ejectment case). The controversy concerns possession of a lot and a residential building on it that originally belonged to petitioners’ grandmother; the building was destroyed by a typhoon and later reconstructed by the private respondents’ predecessors-in-interest.
Before filing in court the parties underwent barangay conciliation which failed. On June 23, 1992 petitioners filed an unlawful detainer (ejectment) action in the MTCC (Civil Case No. R-31419). The MTCC (Judge Priscila S. Agana) ruled for petitioners on February 12, 1993, ordering defendants to vacate, to pay arrears, and awarding costs and attorneys’ fees; it dismissed defendants’ counterclaims. Both parties appealed to the RTC (Branch 24), which modified the MTCC decision on May 25, 1993 by fixing the lease for five years from that date, preserving the P450 monthly rent during the fixed term, and declaring that after expiration the building and improvements would belong to plaintiffs.
The parties then appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA-G.R. SP No. 31456). The Court of Appeals, in a decision per Elbinias, J., annulled the MTCC and RTC decisions, holding that the MTCC lacked jurisdiction because the ownership of the building (not merely better right of possession) had been put in issue; it dismissed the MTCC complaint. A motion for reconsideration was ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the MTCC have jurisdiction to hear the unlawful detainer action despite allegations concerning ownership of the building?
- Were the RTC’s modifications—fixing a five-year lease extension and awarding the building to the lessors after the term—proper und...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)