Case Summary (G.R. No. 483)
Background of the Case
The plaintiff contended that on December 4, 1897, he was granted a piece of land by the municipality of Carmona as remuneration for services rendered in 1895 and 1896. He asserted that he had maintained quiet and peaceful possession of this land until April 28, 1900, when the defendant, identified as the local president of Carmona, unlawfully ousted him and announced to the land's tenants that they were to recognize him as the owner. The complaint, filed on April 17, 1901, detailed the land’s area, location, and boundaries, and sought restitution of possession, damages, and costs.
Proceedings and Evidence Presented
Throughout the trial, four witnesses supported the plaintiff's claims during the preliminary investigation, with three reiterating them at the trial. All witnesses testified affirmatively to the plaintiff's peaceful possession and the defendant's action of ousting him. Notably, while the exact date of the ouster was disputed—claiming it occurred on April 1, 1900, rather than April 28, 1900—the consistency of testimonies corroborated the act of ouster itself.
Dispute Over Dates and Statute of Limitations
The core of the defendant's appeal hinged on the timing of the ouster. The defendant argued that if the ouster indeed occurred on April 1, 1900, the statute of limitations would bar the action as the complaint was filed over a year later. The resolution from the municipal council presented by the defendant purportedly substantiated this date; however, the court found that merely passing a resolution did not equate to the actual execution of an ousting act, which was supported overwhelmingly by witness testimony aligning with the April 28 date.
Legal Analysis of Land Conveyance
The defendant further contended that the land conveyance was void, invoking decrees from the General Government of the Philippines that prohibit the alienation of municipal common lands. However, the court clarified that the legality of the conveyance was not the primary issue; rather, the facts of possession and the wrongful ouster were paramount. The law, specifically Article 446 of the Civil Code,
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 483)
Case Background
- The case involves a dispute over a piece of land conveyed to the plaintiff, Damian Hermitano, by the municipality of Carmona on December 4, 1897, as remuneration for services rendered in 1895 and 1896.
- Hermitano claimed to have had peaceful possession of the land until April 28, 1900, when he was ousted by Marcelino Clarito, then local president of Carmona, who acted without authority.
- The ousting involved Clarito notifying the tenants of the land to recognize him as the owner.
Legal Action Initiated
- Hermitano filed a complaint on April 17, 1901, seeking restoration of possession through an action of restitutory interdict, along with damages and costs.
- The complaint provided a detailed description of the land, including its area, location, and boundaries.
Proceedings in Court
- The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of Hermitano, granting the requested relief.
- The defendant, Clarito, appealed the decision, claiming procedural errors and contesting the date of the alleged ouster.
Testimonies and Evidence
- Four witnesses supported Hermitano's claims during the preliminary investigation, and three additional wi