Title
National Coconut Corporation vs. Geronimo
Case
G.R. No. L-2899
Decision Date
Apr 29, 1949
NCC's good faith possession of Sagrada Orden's property ended after court nullified sale; liable for damages post-demand to vacate.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-2899)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of Possession and Transfer
    • The property originally came under the control of the Philippine Alien Property Custodian.
    • In August 1946, the Custodian transferred possession of the property to the petitioner, National Coconut Corporation.
    • The transfer was executed under the premise of good faith, in line with Arts. 434, 435, 436, and 1950 of the Civil Code.
  • Prior Dispute Involving the Property
    • The Sagrada Orden de Predicadores had previously sold the property to a Japanese corporation.
    • The Court of First Instance, in Civil Case No. 5007, declared that sale null and void.
    • Subsequently, the Philippine Alien Property Custodian, as predecessor in interest to National Coconut Corporation, acquired the property in accordance with law.
  • Nature of Possession and Its Transformation
    • Initially, the possession by the Custodian and then by National Coconut Corporation was held in good faith.
    • Under Art. 451 of the Civil Code (referencing White vs. Williams & Co., 5 Phil., 571), the fruits collected by a possessor in good faith before legal interruption belonged to him.
    • The possession lost its character as good faith only after judgment was rendered against the Philippine Alien Property Custodian.
    • The petitioner’s possession became illegal when it failed to return the property upon being notified or demanded to vacate by the Sagrada Orden de Predicadores.
  • Procedural Background and Timing Issues
    • The complaint for illegal detainer was filed in the Municipal Court of the City of Manila against National Coconut Corporation.
    • The petition examined whether jurisdiction properly vested in the Municipal Court given the one-year period rule for illegal detainer actions.
    • The period from the notice to vacate until the filing of the complaint did not exceed one year, preserving the court’s jurisdiction.

Issues:

  • Good Faith Possession and Its Interruption
    • Whether possession maintained in good faith before judicial interruption continued to be valid when transferred from the Philippine Alien Property Custodian to National Coconut Corporation.
    • At what point possession loses its good faith status—specifically, whether it occurs upon the judgment against the Custodian or when the petitioner fails to comply with a demand to vacate.
  • Jurisdictional Adequacy in Illegal Detainer Cases
    • Whether the Municipal Court had proper jurisdiction to try the illegal detainer case given that the complaint was filed within one year from the notice to vacate.
    • The interpretation of the one-year period under the Rules of Court in relation to the commencement of illegal possession.
  • The Impact of Prior Judgments
    • How the nullification of the sale from the Sagrada Orden de Predicadores to the Japanese corporation affected the legal standing and possession rights of the petitioner.
    • Whether including additional parties (such as the Philippine Alien Property Custodian) was necessary to bind all interests and claims.

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.