Case Digest (G.R. No. 49475)
Facts:
Jorge C. Paderanga v. Hon. Dimalanes B. Buissan, Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Norte, Branch III and Elumba Industries Company, G.R. No. 49475, September 28, 1993, Supreme Court First Division, Bellosillo, J., writing for the Court.
In 1973 petitioner Jorge C. Paderanga and private respondent Elumba Industries Company (represented by its general manager Jose J. Elumba) entered into an oral month-to-month lease of a commercial space owned by petitioner in Ozamiz City; the rent was P150.00 per month and the lease was for an indefinite period. Private respondent used the leased area as a sales office for Allied Air Freight in Ozamiz City.
On April 4, 1977 petitioner allegedly subdivided the leased premises with a partition wall and took possession of one half; private respondent contends it did not acquiesce, while petitioner asserted local acquiescence by respondent’s manager. On July 18, 1977 private respondent filed Civil Case No. 2901 before the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Norte (Dipolog City), praying for damages (moral, exemplary, attorney’s fees and costs) and for the fixing of the lease period at five years. The case was raffled to Branch III.
Petitioner, a resident of Ozamiz City (then under the Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental), moved to dismiss the Dipolog case for improper venue, arguing that the suit was a real action affecting possession of real property and therefore must be brought where the property lies. On November 6, 1978 Respondent Judge Dimalanes B. Buissan denied the motion, holding that the complaint merely involved enforcement of the lease contract and did not raise ownership; on December 4, 1978 the judge denied reconsideration, finding recovery of possession not to be the main issue.
...(Subscriber-Only)Issues:
- Was the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Norte (Dipolog City) a proper venue for Civil Case No. 2901?
- For venue purposes, is the action filed by Elumba Industries Company a personal action or a real action (i.e., does it principally seek recovery of possession or affect t...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)