Title
Semira vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 76031
Decision Date
Mar 2, 1994
Juana Gutierrez sold Lot 4221 to Buenaventura An, later resold to Cipriano Ramirez, then to Miguel Semira. An claimed Semira encroached on Lot 4215; courts ruled Semira owned disputed area based on boundaries, not area, in lump sum sale. SC upheld Semira's possession.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 76031)

Facts:

Ownership and Sale of Lot 4221

  • Juana Gutierrez owned a parcel of land, Lot 4221, in Sto. Nino, Taysan, Batangas.
  • On January 4, 1961, she sold Lot 4221 to Buenaventura An for P850.00 through a "Kasulatan ng Bilihan ng Lupa."
  • The deed stated the lot's estimated area as 822.5 square meters and described its boundaries.

Subsequent Transactions

  • Buenaventura An later acquired two adjacent parcels of land: Lot 4215 (8,606 square meters) from the Hornilla spouses on June 30, 1964, and another lot (11,000 square meters) from Santiago Asi.
  • On October 18, 1972, Buenaventura An sold Lot 4221 to his nephew, Cipriano Ramirez, for P2,500.00. The deed retained the same boundaries but updated the eastern boundary to reflect Buenaventura An's ownership of Lot 4215.

Transfer to Miguel Semira

  • On March 12, 1979, Cipriano Ramirez sold Lot 4221 to Miguel Semira for P20,000.00. The deed now stated the area as 2,200 square meters, based on a 1974 cadastral survey.
  • Semira entered the property and began constructing a rice mill on March 17, 1979.

Dispute Over Land Area

  • Buenaventura An filed a forcible entry complaint against Semira on April 18, 1979, claiming Semira occupied 1,377 square meters of Lot 4215, which An had acquired in 1964.
  • Semira denied the allegations, asserting ownership of the entire 2,200 square meters of Lot 4221 based on the 1979 deed of sale.

Procedural History

  • The Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) initially dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction but later ruled in favor of Semira, recognizing his ownership and possession of the disputed area.
  • The Regional Trial Court (RTC) reversed the MCTC, ruling that Buenaventura An had prior possession since 1964 and that Semira forcibly occupied the land.
  • The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Boundaries Over Area in Lump Sum Sales: When land is sold for a lump sum, the boundaries stated in the contract determine the scope of the sale, not the area. The vendor is obligated to deliver all land within the boundaries, even if the actual area exceeds the stated size.
  2. Ownership and Possession Intertwined: In this case, resolving the issue of prior possession required determining ownership. The disputed portion's inclusion in Lot 4221 or Lot 4215 depended on ownership, which was central to the case.
  3. Forcible Entry Requires Prior Possession: Buenaventura An failed to prove prior physical possession of the disputed area, a necessary element for a forcible entry claim.
  4. Provisional Nature of Ownership Determination: The Court's decision on ownership was provisional and limited to resolving the forcible entry case. It does not bar a separate action to determine title to the land.

Conclusion:

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Miguel Semira, reinstating the MCTC's decision and holding that the boundaries, not the area, governed the sale of Lot 4221. Buenaventura An's forcible entry claim failed due to his inability to prove prior possession.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.