Title
Baluyo y Gamora vs. Spouses De la Cruz
Case
G.R. No. 197058
Decision Date
Oct 14, 2015
Gregory Baluyo claimed prior possession of a property via a Deed of Absolute Sale; respondents contested ownership. SC ruled in favor of Gregory, reinstating possession, while allowing separate ownership disputes.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 197058)

Statement of Facts

In May 2008, Gregory Baluyo filed a complaint against the De La Cruz spouses, asserting that he was the caretaker of the property purchased by his brother. The respondents, however, argued that they have legitimate ownership as it belonged to Rebecca's deceased father, Bonifacio Dimaano. The Municipal Trial Court (MTC) initially ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the respondents to return possession and awarding damages. This decision was upheld by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), which recognized the validity of the Deed of Absolute Sale presented by the petitioner.

Court of Appeals Ruling

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC's ruling, concluding that the petitioner did not sufficiently prove his prior physical possession of the property, an essential element in forcible entry cases. The CA highlighted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate which specific portion of the land was conveyed to him, undermining his claim of lawful possession.

Petitioner's Arguments

In his petition for review on certiorari, the petitioner contended that the CA misinterpreted the factual circumstances of the case, emphasizing that the family had lived on the property since 1970 and established claims of ownership through the Deed of Absolute Sale. He claimed that the identification of the half-portion of the property conveyed was evident, as the respondents had acquired the other half from the Dimaano spouses.

Respondents' Counterarguments

The respondents countered that the evidence provided by the petitioner was self-serving and lacked corroboration, arguing that the Deed of Absolute Sale was questionable, including concerns over its notarization and its appearance nine years after its purported execution.

Judicial Ruling

The Supreme Court found the petition meritorious, underscoring that proof of prior physical possession is requisite in forcible entry cases. It reiterated that the petitioner, despite any challenges to ownership, could claim possession if he was previously in possession. The Court ruled that the notarized deed provided strong evidence supporting the petitioner's claims, enjoying a presumption of regularity, which the respondents failed to overcome.

Analysis of Ownership Claims

The Court acknowledged that both parties asserted ownership over the property, with the petitioner relying on the Deed of Absolute Sale executed in November 1999 and the respondents affirming their claim through succession, as Rebecca was the sol

...continue reading

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