Case Digest (G.R. No. 149599)
Facts:
Rudy Lao v. Jaime Lao, G.R. No. 149599, May 16, 2005, Supreme Court Second Division, Callejo, Sr., J., writing for the Court.As early as 1956 spouses Julian and Anita Lao constructed a building on a parcel of land in Balasan, Iloilo that was owned by Alfredo Alava and covered by TCT No. 28382; Anita operated a business there and portions were occupied and let without written agreements. On May 12, 1982, Alava and Anita Lao executed a written Contract of Lease for 35 years at an annual rent of P120.00; that lease was not filed with the Register of Deeds and thus not annotated on the title.
The petitioner, Rudy Lao, leased another portion of the same property for his business and knew of the existence of Anita’s building and lease. On March 21, 1995, Rudy Lao purchased the land from Alava and was later issued TCT No. 152,097; the lease to Anita remained subsisting. On July 14, 1997, Rudy filed a Complaint for Unlawful Detainer in the 1st Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Carles-Balasan against Jaime Lao, alleging the respondent occupied a portion of the property without lease or payment and only by petitioner’s tolerance, and prayed for ejectment, payment of rentals from January 24, 1997, attorney’s fees and costs.
In his answer Jaime alleged the true lessee was his mother Anita Lao, produced the lease and receipts for rent, and asserted he was merely manager of his mother’s building and business. At the MCTC preliminary conference the respondent admitted actual possession while the petitioner admitted knowledge of Anita’s lease and that Anita had leased the portion before petitioner’s purchase. The MCTC, however, rendered judgment for the petitioner on March 4, 1999, ordering the respondent evicted, monthly rentals of P3,000, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs.
The respondent appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Barotac Viejo, Branch 66, which on January 28, 2000 affirmed the MCTC judgment with modification, ordering P1,000 per month as reasonable use from January 1997 until turnover, and awarding reduced attorney’s fees and litigation expenses; the RTC reasoned that under Article 1676 of the New Civil Code the purchaser could terminate an unregistered lease and that the respondent, not Anita, was the real party in possession. The respondent then filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals (CA), which on February 27, 2001 set aside and reversed the RTC decision, holding that the true real party-in-interest defendant was Anita Lao, as lessee, and that Jaime was merely her manager/agent and occupant.
Petitioner sought this Court’s review by a petition for ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was Jaime Lao the real party-in-interest defendant in the unlawful detainer action, or was the true party-in-interest Anita Lao, the lessee?
- Could the purchaser (Rudy Lao) validly pursue unlawful detainer against the occupant (Jaime) despite the subsisting lease to Anita Lao, or was he obliged to proceed against...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)