Title
Rodriguez vs. Rodriguez
Case
G.R. No. 175720
Decision Date
Sep 11, 2007
Juanito Rodriguez's property, transferred via deed of sale to Cresenciana, led to an unlawful detainer case. Courts ruled possession to Cresenciana, citing unprobated will and Torrens title, while ownership remains unresolved.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 175720)

Petitioner and Respondents

• Petitioner’s Claim – Lawful Torrens-registered owner seeking ejectment of respondents and their lessees for unlawful detainer.
• Respondents’ Defense – Co-owners by succession; the 1984 sale was void for simulation and undue influence; will-based partition recognized their right to occupy.

Key Dates

• Oct. 27, 1983 – Execution of “Huling Habilin at Testamento.”
• June 14, 1984 – Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of petitioner; issuance of TCT No. 150431.
• Aug. 23, 1990 – Partition Agreement among Juanito, petitioner and respondents.
• Sept. 20, 2001 – Unlawful detainer complaint filed by petitioner.
• Feb. 26, 2002 – MTC dismisses ejectment suit.
• (Date unspecified) – RTC reverses MTC, orders ejectment and back rent.
• June 27, 2006 – CA reinstates MTC decision.
• Sept. 11, 2007 – Supreme Court decision.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution – Protection of property rights and Torrens system.
• Rule 70, Sec. 16, Rules of Court – Summary unlawful detainer; provisional resolution of ownership.
• Civil Code, Art. 838 – Probate requirement for wills.
• P.D. 1529, Sec. 48 – Indefeasibility of Torrens certificate.
• Jurisprudence – Collateral attack prohibition; summary nature of ejectment (Racaza v. Gozum; Ross Rica Sales Center, Inc. v. Ong; Co v. Militar).

Facts of the Case

Juanito’s 1983 will bequeathed specific units to petitioner and his children. In 1984 he sold the entire property to petitioner for P20,000. Despite her registered ownership, petitioner tolerated respondents’ occupation until they leased units to third parties without consent and refused to vacate or pay rent.

Procedural History

• MTC – Held deed of sale simulated; recognized unprobated will and partition agreement; dismissed ejectment.
• RTC – Held Torrens title and deed of sale conclusive; wills unprobated; reversed MTC; ordered ejectment and P5,000/month rent per unit.
• CA – Found ownership unresolved in summary ejectment; gave effect to will and partition; reinstated MTC dismissal.
• SC – Granted review; reinstated RTC decision.

Issue

May a court in an unlawful detainer proceeding provisionally resolve an ownership dispute over a Torrens-registered property to determine the right of possession when defendants invoke ownership based on an unprobated will and partition agreement?

Ruling on Unlawful Detainer

Unlawful detainer is a summary remedy protecting actual possession. Title generally not in issue unless intertwined with possession. Under Rule 70, Sec. 16, if ownership is pleaded and essential to possession, the court may provisionally decide ownership solely to determine who is entitled to possession de facto.

Provisional Determination of Ownership

Such provisional determination does not bar a direct action on title. Here, respondents’ reliance on an unprobated will and partition is legally ineffective, while petitioner’s Torrens certificate and deed of sale remain valid and indefeasible for purposes of the ejectment.

Invalidity of Will and Partition Agreement

Article 838 of the Civil Code mandates probate for wills to pass property. The unprobated will and the ensu

...continue reading

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