Title
Araos vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 107057
Decision Date
Jun 2, 1994
Long-term lessees of a Manila apartment building were lawfully ejected after the lease expired, but rental increases imposed by the court were invalidated, requiring payment of original rates with interest.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 107057)

Background of the Case

The petitioners, who had been lessees for approximately 25 years under a written lease agreement with Vivien B. Bernardino, continued their occupancy after the lease expired on January 31, 1988. Monthly rental payments were made despite the absence of a written lease post-expiration. On July 11, 1991, Bernardino sold the apartment building to Jovan Land, Inc. Shortly after, both Bernardino and Jovan Land, Inc. served eviction notices to the petitioners, leading to the initiation of ten unlawful detainer cases.

Judgments at Various Levels

The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) rendered a joint judgment favoring the private respondent, ordering the petitioners to vacate the premises and pay various amounts for rental arrears and reasonable compensation for continued occupancy. The MeTC opined that the lease had transitioned to a month-to-month basis, and based on Articles 1670 and 1687 of the Civil Code, concluded that judicial eviction was warranted upon expiration of the lease period.

Appeal to the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

The petitioners appealed to the RTC, which reversed the MeTC's decision, stating that the cases were governed by B.P. Blg. 25 and B.P. Blg. 877. The RTC determined that these laws suspended the application of the Civil Code regarding eviction based on the expiration of a lease when the conditions outlined in the applicable laws were met. It also criticized the rental increases deemed excessive.

Court of Appeals Decision

The private respondent sought a review from the Court of Appeals, which reinstated the MeTC's ruling. The Court ruled that an oral month-to-month lease is considered to have a definite term, subject to termination by a demand to vacate from the lessor, thus validating the petition for eviction. The Court emphasized a shift in legislative language regarding the grounds for ejectment and relied on prevailing jurisprudence.

Supreme Court's Examination

The Supreme Court's review focused on the legality and justification for the increased rental rates set by the MeTC and endorsed by the Court of Appeals. It underscored that in ejectment cases, only reasonable compensation for occ

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.