Case Digest (G.R. No. L-15609)
Facts:
Rafael Marcelo applied for registration of three parcels of land (Lots 1, 2, and 3) in Taguig, Rizal. The application was opposed by Leocadio Pagsisihan, predecessor-in-interest of respondent Clemente Pagsisihan; the Court of First Instance of Rizal, sitting as a land registration court, ruled in Marcelo’s favor only as to Lot 1 and declared Lots 2 and 3 as public lands. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, recognizing Marcelo as owner of Lots 2 and 3, and after the judgment became final, a decree and certificate of title were issued in Marcelo’s name for all three lots.
When Clemente Pagsisihan refused to surrender possession of Lots 2 and 3 and to remove his house thereon, Marcelo sought a writ of possession. The court granted the writ, but Marcelo later filed a petition for demolition. On May 2, 1959, the trial judge denied the petition on the ground that the land registration court had no jurisdiction to order demolition; the denial was affirmed on June 8, 1959, prompting Marcelo to file a petition for certiorari and mandamus.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of First Instance of Rizal, sitting as a land registration court, had jurisdiction to order demolition of improvements to enforce a writ of possession.
- Whether the Rules of Court provision on demolition in execution, Section 13, Rule 39, applies to land registration proceedings in a suppletory character.
Ruling:
The Court granted the petition, set aside the orders dated May 2, 1959 and June 8, 1959, and remanded the case for further proceedings on Marcelo’s petition for demolition. Clemente Pagsisihan was ordered to pay the costs.
The Court held that refusing to issue the demolition writ would defeat the purpose of the land registration law by compelling the successful claimant to file another action elsewhere to enjoy the fruits of the judgment.
Ratio:
The Court reasoned that a writ of possession in a land registration case implies delivery of possession to the successful litigant, and demolition is a necessary complement to make the writ effective. It found incorrect the trial judge’s view that Section 13, Rule 39 applies only to ordinary actions and not to land registration proceedings, emphasizing that the Rules of Court apply to land registration cases in a suppletory character under Rule 132.
The Court further relied on Rule 124, Sec. 6, which authorizes courts, when jurisdiction is conferred, to employ auxiliary writs and processes necessary to carry such jurisdiction into effect, and on the principle that courts have inherent power to do all things reasonably necessary for the administration of justice within their jurisdiction. Thus, the land registration court could issue a demolition order consistent with Section 13, Rule 39, subject to the procedure therein.
Doctrine:
- A writ of possession in a land registration proceeding carries with it the need for a demolition order as a complement to make possession effective.
- (Get Pro to unlock 3 more doctrines)