Title
Ruiz vs. J. M. Tuason and Co., Inc.
Case
G.R. No. L-18692
Decision Date
Jan 31, 1963
Florencio Deudor sold land to Jose Dinglasan, who transferred rights to Manuel B. Ruiz. Ruiz sued J.M. Tuason & Co. for specific performance, but the Supreme Court dismissed the case, ruling it a local action requiring venue in Quezon City, where the property is located.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-64750)

Background of the Case

Manuel B. Ruiz filed a lawsuit in the Court of First Instance of Manila, seeking to enjoin J. M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and the Sheriff of Quezon City from executing a writ of execution in Civil Case No. Q-3492, which involved property owned by Sixto M. Cacho. Simultaneously, Ruiz requested the court to compel J. M. Tuason & Co., Inc. to execute a final deed of sale for a 420-square-meter parcel of land at P7.00 per square meter and to account for a prior payment of P855.00 he made to Florencio Deudor, one of the defendants.

Procedural History

Florencio Deudor filed a motion to dismiss, citing an improper venue, lack of cause of action, and the expiration of the statute of limitations for Ruiz's claims. Meanwhile, J. M. Tuason & Co., Inc. requested a bill of particulars. Despite opposition from Ruiz, the lower court dismissed the case on March 11, 1961, asserting that the venue was incorrectly laid since the subject property was in Quezon City, making Manila an inappropriate venue for the case. Ruiz’s subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied, prompting this appeal.

Core Allegations of the Complaint

The complaint outlined several facts: Florencio Deudor owned a larger piece of land containing 210,000 square meters, a portion of which was sold to Jose Dinglasan. According to the narrative, Dinglasan secured the right to a 420-square-meter section, on which he built houses. Debts owed to Deudor led to litigation, culminating in a compromise agreement that recognized Dinglasan as a purchaser with partial payments made.

Ownership Claims and the Compromise Agreement

The compromise agreement served as a significant legal foundation. It established a binding contractual relationship between J. M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and the various purchasers of land, confirming that they recognized existing sales and obligations. Ruiz, having acquired rights from Dinglasan who subsequently sold to Sixto M. Cacho, claimed ownership of the land in question based on his contractual relationship stemming from the compromise agreement.

Nature of the Action and Venue Requirements

Ruiz contended that his action was transitory, aimed at specific performance. However, the court reasoned that since Ruiz requested a deed of sale and title issuance for property located in Quezon City, the core nature of his action was rooted in a dispute over ownership of real property. The court invoked Section 3, Rule 5 of the Rules of Court, which stipulates that actions affecting real property must be filed in the province where the property lies.

Legal Precedents and Interpretation

The court cited precedents emphasizing the importan

...continue reading

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