Title
Lopez vs. Reyes
Case
G.R. No. L-29498
Decision Date
Mar 31, 1977
Dispute over 8-hectare land affirmed by courts; petitioners' motion to modify writ of execution denied due to res judicata and finality of judgment.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-29498)

Facts:

Santiago Lopez and Irineo Lopez (petitioners) were plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 2298 for quieting of title, filed against Juan Magallanes (respondent). On August 9, 1958, the Court of First Instance of Davao, presided over by Judge Honorio Romero, dismissed the complaint and ordered petitioners “to segregate the eight (8) hectares portion of the land covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 2990” and to deliver the corresponding title to Magallanes. The trial court based the dismissal on the fact that the right of ownership and possession over the same eight (8) hectares had already been finally adjudicated by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. 9874-R, where petitioners and Magallanes were parties. Petitioners then appealed directly to the Supreme Court on a question of law on September 25, 1958, and on April 23, 1963 the Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the action to quiet title over the eight-hectare portion was barred by res judicata due to the earlier Court of Appeals judgment; that Supreme Court decision became final and executory on May 28, 1963. Approximately five years later, on April 2, 1968, Magallanes moved for execution of the April 23, 1963 Supreme Court decision. On April 6, 1968, the trial court issued a writ of execution directing petitioners, through the ex officio sheriff Eriberto Unson, “to segregate the eight (8) hectares portion of the land covered by Original Certificate of Title No. 2990” and to deliver the corresponding title, with lawful fees for service, consistent with what Magallanes had previously recovered from the Supreme Court in G.R. No. L-14853 dated April 23, 1965. On April 15, 1968, petitioners filed a Motion to Modify Writ of Execution, arguing that while the writ ordered segregation of eight (8) hectares, it did not specify the particular area delineated in a Sale with Right to Repurchase dated May 10, 1942 between Angel Lopez (petitioners’ predecessor) and Magallanes, where the boundaries were allegedly definite (North by Lenares Manabo; East by Ramon Kimpo; South by Municipal Road (Malita Sanghai); and West by Pedro Lopez). Petitioners further claimed that because the land was not yet surveyed at the time of the sale and the area was only estimated as eight hectares, the parties contemplated only the area enclosed by those boundaries, and that after survey and subdivision the portion in Magallanes’s favor contained only sixty-four thousand six hundred forty (64,640) square meters, now covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-5340 in the name of Irineo Lopez, whom petitioners were willing to transfer by deed in Magallanes’s favor. Magallanes opposed, insisting that the writ implemented the final and executory judgment which specifically ordered segregation and delivery of the eight-hectare portion, and that the sale upheld by the Supreme Court was of eight hectares out of a 16-hectare tract, while petitioners’ survey and segregation that produced the 64,640-square-meter figure was supposedly made after the sale and without Magallanes’s knowledge or consent. On April 26, 1968, respondent Judge Manases G. Reyes denied the motion, reasoning that the writ enforced a final judgment beyond his authority to amend or modify, and the motion for reconsideration was later denied on June 21, 1968. Petitioners then filed the present special civil action of certiorari with preliminary injunction, alleging grave abuse of discretion in the denial.

Issues:

Whether respondent Judge gravely abused his discretion when he denied petitioners’ Motion to Modify the writ of execution, which sought to limit segregation to 64,640 square meters rather than the eight (8) hectares ordered by the final judgment.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.