Title
Supreme Court
Montero vs. Montero, Jr.
Case
G.R. No. 217755
Decision Date
Sep 18, 2019
Petitioner Elmer Montero sought nullity of an Affidavit of Adjudication and reconveyance of land, but the Supreme Court ruled the RTC lacked jurisdiction due to the property's assessed value below P20,000, affirming the MTC as the proper forum.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 217755)

Trial Court Proceedings

Petitioner Elmer filed a complaint in the RTC of Bangued for:

  1. Declaration of nullity of the Affidavit of Adjudication
  2. Cancellation of Tax Declaration No. 5289 and OCT No. P-14452
  3. Reconveyance of the property to Dominga’s heirs
  4. Damages and preliminary injunction

Respondents Santiago and Charlie moved to dismiss, asserting that:

  • Under Section 19 of BP 129, an assessed value below ₱20,000 places jurisdiction in the Municipal Trial Court, not the RTC.
  • Section 48 of PD 1529 prohibits collateral attack on Torrens titles, rendering the complaint a collateral attack.

The RTC denied the motion on September 3, 2013, finding the cause incapable of pecuniary estimation and constituting a direct attack on the title. A motion for reconsideration was likewise denied on November 8, 2013. Respondents then filed a Rule 65 petition in the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The CA granted the Rule 65 petition, holding:

  • The principal issue is ownership and possession of the real property, not merely invalidation of documents.
  • The assessed value of ₱3,010 places jurisdiction exclusively in the Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Courts under BP 129, Section 19.
  • The RTC therefore lacked jurisdiction and should have granted the motion to dismiss.

Issue on Appeal

Whether the RTC had jurisdiction over a complaint that ultimately involves title to, possession of, or interest in real property with an assessed value below ₱20,000, or whether the action is an equitable claim incapable of pecuniary estimation under Article VIII, Section 5(5) of the 1987 Constitution and BP 129.

Supreme Court Ruling

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA Decision and Resolution, holding that:

  1. Jurisdiction over subject matter is conferred by law and cannot be waived. Under BP 129, as amended by RA 7691, RTCs do not have original jurisdiction over civil actions involving title to or possession of real property with assessed value not exceeding ₱20,000.
  2. An action “involving title to real property” is determined by the plaintiff’s allegations and principal relief sought. Here, petitioner Elmer primarily sought to establish and confirm his ownership and possession rights, with cancellation of the Torrens documents following as a necessary consequence.
  3. Even if cast as an annulment of documents, the underlying claim

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.