Title
De la Cruz vs. Nino
Case
G.R. No. L-5797
Decision Date
Jan 13, 1911
Marcelo de la Cruz claimed ownership of 29 parcels of land, contested by defendants as co-owners and intervener Santos Jarapan. Court ruled defendants, as heirs, co-owned half; Jarapan’s claim dismissed for lack of evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-5797)

Allegations and Claims

Marcelo de la Cruz claims ownership over multiple parcels of land, asserting that the defendants have unlawfully occupied half of these properties for nearly two years. He seeks legal recourse to recover possession of said lands and their produce during this period. Conversely, the defendants deny de la Cruz's claims, asserting lawful ownership of half the properties, contending they have title rights due to an understanding with de la Cruz. They request a judgment in their favor and seek to have the costs assessed against the plaintiff.

Intervener's Position

Santos Jarapan intervened, claiming ownership of all lands concerning the dispute since November 15, 1871, based on just title. He asserts that he left the land's administration to a caretaker who abandoned the properties due to unforeseen circumstances, leaving de la Cruz and defendants in illegal possession. Jarapan seeks a ruling favoring his claim of ownership over the contested lands and to hold the plaintiff and defendants accountable for his legal costs.

Initial Judgment

On September 23, 1905, the Court absolved the defendants and the intervener from the complaints filed by de la Cruz, thereby granting their ownership claims. Costs were to be shared equally between the plaintiff and the intervener. Subsequently, both de la Cruz and Jarapan filed motions for annulment of the judgment, which the court later denied, prompting the appellants to file bills of exceptions for their appeal.

Ownership Dispute Resolution

The case's resolution hinges on the determination of ownership rights, primarily substantiated by the public instruments and historical partnership between de la Cruz and Feliciano Vicente — the deceased relative of the defendants. The evidence indicated that despite titles being in de la Cruz’s name, the properties were held in a partnership arrangement. This understanding was reportedly documented in an agreement (Exhibit C), which divides the lands evenly between de la Cruz and Vicente.

Legal Principles Applied

Under Article 1225 of the Civil Code, a legally acknowledged private instrument holds the same validity as a public instrument among those who signed it and their legal representatives. The original partnership agreement, in conjunction with acknowledgments of co-ownership by de la Cruz, establishes the defendants’ legal standing as half-owners of the disputed lands.

Findings on Intervener's Claims

Santos Jarapan's claims as an intervener were found lacking in evidentiary support. He failed to prove ownership through sufficiently specific documentation linking him to the lands in ques

...continue reading

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