Title
Jader vs. Heirs of Allones
Case
G.R. No. 209014
Decision Date
Mar 27, 2019
Heirs of Mariano Turgo dispute land ownership; RTC dismisses partition case, citing jurisdiction and ownership issues; Supreme Court affirms, citing procedural lapses and lack of grave abuse.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. 182953)

Factual Background

The dispute arises from the intestate succession of Mariano Turgo, who died on October 23, 1924, leaving six children. On September 30, 1960, the heirs executed a Deed of Extrajudicial Settlement, partitioning a property measuring 1,125 square meters, which underwent subsequent tax declaration changes, culminating in Tax Declaration No. 9796, covering the land in question. By 1985, a relinquishment was executed by one of the heirs, Nicolas, in favor of his daughter, Evelyn, who later acquired the land through Free Patent No. IV-8-2187, leading to the issuance of Original Certificate of Title P-9980. Petitioner Nieves Turgo Jader filed an Affidavit of Adverse Claim and attempted to assert her ownership, resulting in a series of events including an eviction and subsequent legal actions.

Proceedings Before the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

In 2009, after unsuccessful attempts at alternative settlement, the petitioners filed an action for partition with damages in the RTC of Infanta, Quezon, categorized under Civil Case No. 785-1. The plaintiffs later moved for summary judgment, which the RTC denied upon determining the existence of genuine issues, particularly regarding the true ownership of the land. Notably, the RTC ruled that the case's jurisdiction fell below the threshold for the RTC as specified in BP 129 and RA 7691 because the assessed value of the property was P13,055. The RTC ultimately dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, reasoning that the primary issue was one of ownership and not merely partition.

Appeals and Denial of Motion for Reconsideration

The plaintiffs appealed the RTC's dismissal; however, the motions were denied, with the court reiterating its rationale: the case must be filed in a first-level court due to the actual assessed value of the involved property. The RTC advised the plaintiffs that they could re-file their case in the appropriate lower court or opt for a special civil action via Rule 65. Following these developments, the petitioners elevated the issue to the Supreme Court through a petition for certiorari.

Issues Presented on Certiorari

The primary contention presented in the petition for certiorari was whether the RTC exhibited grave abuse of discretion in its rulings, particularly concerning the denial of the Notice of Appeal and the Motion for Reconsideration. The petitioners sought to invalidate both the April 22 and May 24, 2013 RTC Orders citing improper jurisdictional assessments made by the lower court.

Court’s Ruling

The Supreme Court dismissed the petition based on procedural grounds, noting that the petitioners failed to attach a certified true copy of the May 24, 2013 RTC Order as required by the Ru

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.