Title
Supreme Court
Spouses Esmaquel vs. Coprada
Case
G.R. No. 152423
Decision Date
Dec 15, 2010
Owners of land tolerated respondent’s long-term occupation; ejectment granted as oral sale unproven, laches inapplicable, title indefeasible.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-44001)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Ownership and Initial Occupation
  • Petitioners Marcos R. Esmaquel and Victoria Sordevilla are the registered owners of a 253‐sqm parcel in Barangay San Miguel, Majayjay, Laguna, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-93542.
  • In 1945, out of pity, petitioners allowed respondent Maria Coprada and her family to occupy the land rent-free, upon condition they vacate when needed; respondent built a nipa hut, later a semi-concrete house, and began paying real property taxes in 1984 (in petitioners’ names).
  • Respondent’s Alleged Acquisition and Defense
  • Respondent contends permission originated from Emiliana Coprada (Victoria’s mother) in 1945, as the lot was then wasteland.
  • She claims an oral agreement with Victoria in the early 1960s to buy a 100-sqm portion for ₱2,000, paid in installments by 1962; no written deed or receipt was executed.
  • Respondent asserts payment of taxes and improvements qualify her as a builder in good faith, entitled to reimbursement or retention under Articles 448, 546, and 548 of the Civil Code.
  • She further maintains petitioners’ delay in asserting their rights constitutes laches barring ejectment.
  • Demand and Course of Proceedings
  • Petitioners made a verbal demand, then a letter dated August 22, 1996 giving respondent until November 30, 1996 to vacate; barangay mediation failed.
  • On February 24, 1997, petitioners filed an ejectment complaint in the 2nd Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Magdalena, Liliw and Majayjay, Laguna.
  • MCTC Decision (September 11, 1997): dismissed complaint, ruling laches barred petitioners and presuming valid oral sale.
  • RTC Decision (November 24, 1998): reversed MCTC, found respondent’s possession unlawful upon demand, ordered ejectment and removal of improvements.
  • CA Decision (April 6, 2001) and Resolution (February 15, 2002): reinstated MCTC dismissal; SC granted petition for certiorari under Rule 45.

Issues:

  • Whether the registered owners’ right to recover possession under a Torrens title is imprescriptible and immune from laches.
  • Whether respondent’s unproven oral sale claim can defeat petitioners’ ownership and right to eject.
  • Whether laches had set in against petitioners or respondent.
  • Whether petitioners’ Torrens certificate of title may be collaterally attacked in an ejectment case.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.