Title
Enriquez vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 83720
Decision Date
Oct 4, 1991
Petitioner, a tenant, contested private respondents' ownership of a lot where her house stood. After losing in lower courts and the Court of Appeals, she sought certiorari, but the Supreme Court dismissed her petition, upholding the finality of the appellate court's decision.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 192893)

Factual Background

Felicitas Enriquez and the Santos spouses were long-term occupants of adjacent lots on Laon Laan St. In 1976, the Santos spouses purchased a 200-square meter portion of land from the original owners, resulting in the issuance of Transfer Certificate of Title No. C-2892. Subsequently, it was revealed that Enriquez’s house was partially constructed on the land acquired by the Santos spouses, leading to a landlord-tenant relationship where Enriquez began paying monthly rent to the Santos family.

Ejectment Proceedings

In September 1982, the Santos spouses filed an ejectment suit against Enriquez in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Caloocan City, alleging non-payment of rent and the necessity of the property. The trial court ordered Enriquez to vacate the premises, a decision which was affirmed by the Regional Trial Court upon appeal.

Initial Civil Action by Petitioner

Simultaneously, Enriquez initiated her own legal action against the Santos spouses in 1983 for the annulment of the deed of sale and damages. However, this case was dismissed without prejudice, leading her to file a subsequent case solely for damages, which was tried in the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City, concluding with a favorable decision for Enriquez in November 1984. This decision required the Santos couple to sell the land on which Enriquez’s house stood at a price of P100 per square meter.

Appeals and Judicial Review

The Santos spouses sought redress through a petition for certiorari, arguing that the trial court's decision should be overturned. The Intermediate Court of Appeals initially dismissed this petition on grounds of timeliness but later reinstated it after concluding that the late filing was due to excusable negligence. In August 1987, the appellate court eventually ruled in favor of the Santos spouses, thereby setting aside the earlier ruling of the Regional Trial Court.

Finality of Judgment

Following this appellate decision, Enriquez filed a motion for reconsideration, which was subsequently denied. The appellate court's decision entered final judgment in early February 1988, rendering it executory. Subsequently, in June 1988, Enriquez initiated a special civil action of certiorari under Rule 65, arguing that her previous resort to appeals was no longer viable because of the finality of the appellate decision.

Legal Reasoning

The Supreme Co

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.