Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. L-57348 May 16, 1985
FRANCISCO DEPRA, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
AGUSTIN DUMLAO, defendant-appellant.
Roberto D. Dineros for plaintiff-appellee.
Veil D. Hechanova for defendant-appellant.

MELENCIO-ERRERA, J.:
This is an appeal fo! the Ode of the fo!e "out of Fist Instance of Iloilo to the then "out of #ppeals, $hich
the latte cetified to this instance as involvin% pue &uestions of la$
Plaintiff-appellee, Fancisco Depa, is the o$ne of a pacel of land e%isteed unde Tansfe "etificate of Title
No. T'()*, +no$n as ,ot No. -)., situated in the !unicipalit/ of Du!an%as, Iloilo, $ith an aea of appo0i!atel/
),)*( s&uae !etes. #%ustin Du!lao, defendant-appellant, o$ns an ad1oinin% lot, desi%nated as ,ot No. -)',
$ith an appo0i!ate aea of 2'3 s&. !s.
So!eti!e in 34*2, $hen D5M,#O constucted his house on his lot, the +itchen theeof had encoached on an
aea of thit/ fou 6'78 s&uae !etes of D9PR#:s popet/, #fte the encoach!ent $as discoveed in a
elocation suve/ of D9PR#:s lot !ade on Nove!be 2,34*2, his !othe, ;eati< Depa afte $itin% a de!and
lette as+in% D5M,#O to !ove bac+ fo! his encoach!ent, filed an action fo 5nla$ful Detaine on Febua/
-,34*' a%ainst D5M,#O in the Municipal "out of of Du!an%as, doc+eted as "ivil "ase No 3, Said co!plaint
$as late a!ended to include D9PR# as a pat/ plain. plaintiff.
#fte tial, the Municipal "out found that D5M,#O $as a builde in %ood faith, and appl/in% #ticle 77) of the
"ivil "ode, endeed 1ud%!ent on Septe!be 24, 34*', the dispositive potion of $hich eads=
Odein% that a foced lease is ceated bet$een the paties $ith the plaintiffs, as lessos, and the
defendants as lessees, ove the disputed potion $ith an aea of thit/ fou 6'78 s&uae !etes,
the ent to be paid is five 6P..((8 pesos a !onth, pa/able b/ the lessee to the lessos $ithin the
fist five 6.8 da/s of the !onth the ent is due> and the lease shall co!!ence on the da/ that this
decision shall have beco!e final.
Fo! the foe%oin% 1ud%!ent, neithe pat/ appeal so that, ff it $ee a valid 1ud%!ent, it $ould have odinail/
lapsed into finalit/, but even then, D9PR# did not accept pa/!ent of entals so that D5M,#O deposited such
entals $ith the Municipal "out.
On ?ul/ 3.,34*7, D9PR# filed a "o!plaint fo @uietin% of Title a%ainst D5M,#O befoe the then "out of Fist
Instance of Iloilo, ;anch IV 6Tial "out8, involvin% the ve/ sa!e '7 s&uae !etes, $hich $as the bone of
contention in the Municipal "out. D5M,#O, in his #ns$e, ad!itted the encoach!ent but alle%ed, in the !ain,
that the pesent suit is baed b/ res judicata b/ vitue of the Decision of the Municipal "out, $hich had beco!e
final and e0ecuto/.
#fte the case had been set fo pe-tial, the paties sub!itted a ?oint Motion fo ?ud%!ent based on the
Stipulation of Facts attached theeto. Pe!ised theeon, the Tial "out on Octobe '3, 34*7, issued the assailed
Ode, deceein%=
AB9R9FOR9, the "out finds and so holds that the thit/ fou 6'78 s&uae !etes sub1ect of this
liti%ation is pat and pacel of ,ot -). of the "adastal Suve/ of Du!an%as of $hich the plaintiff
is o$ne as evidenced b/ Tansfe "etificate of Title No. '()* and such plaintiff is entitled to
possess the sa!e.
Aithout ponounce!ent as to costs.
SO ORD9R9D.
Rebuttin% the a%u!ent of res judicata elied upon b/ D5M,#O, D9PR# clai!s that the Decision of the
Municipal "out $as null and void ab initio because its 1uisdiction is li!ited to the sole issue of possession,
$heeas decisions affectin% lease, $hich is an encu!bance on eal popet/, !a/ onl/ be endeed b/ "outs of
Fist Instance.
#ddessin% out selves to the issue of validit/ of the Decision of the Municipal "out, $e hold the sa!e to be null
and void. The 1ud%!ent in a detaine case is effective in espect of possession onl/ 6Sec. *, Rule *(, Rules of
"out8.
1
The Municipal "out ove-stepped its bounds $hen it i!posed upon the paties a situation of Cfoced
leaseC, $hich li+e Cfoced co-o$neshipC is not favoed in la$. Futhe!oe, a lease is an inteest in eal popet/,
1uisdiction ove $hich belon%s to "outs of Fist Instance 6no$ Re%ional Tial "outs8 6Sec. 776b8, ?udicia/ #ct
of 347)>
!
Sec. 34 628 ;atas Pa!bansa ;l%. 3248.
3
Since the Municipal "out, acted $ithout 1uisdiction, its
Decision $as null and void and cannot opeate as res judicata to the sub1ect co!plaint fo @uetin% of Title.
;esides, even if the Decision $ee valid, the ule on res judicata $ould not appl/ due to diffeence in cause of
action. In the Municipal "out, the cause of action $as the depivation of possession, $hile in the action to &uiet
title, the cause of action $as based on o$neship. Futhe!oe, Sec. *, Rule *( of the Rules of "out e0plicitl/
povides that 1ud%!ent in a detaine case Cshall not ba an action bet$een the sa!e paties espectin% title to
the land. C
4

"onceded in the Stipulation of Facts bet$een the paties is that D5M,#O $as a builde in %ood faith. Thus,
). That the sub1ect !atte in the unla$ful detaine case, "ivil "ase No. 3, befoe the Municipal
"out of Du!an%as, Iloilo involves the sa!e sub1ect !atte in the pesent case, the Thit/-fou
6'78 s&uae !etes potion of land and built theeon in %ood faith is a potion of defendant:s
+itchen and has been in the possession of the defendant since 34.2 continuousl/ up to the
pesent> ... 69!phasis ous8
"onsistent $ith the pinciple that ou "out s/ste!, li+e an/ othe, !ust be a dispute esolvin% !echanis!, $e
accod le%al effect to the a%ee!ent of the paties, $ithin the conte0t of thei !utual concession and stipulation.
The/ have, theeb/, chosen a legal formula to esolve thei dispute to appeal pl/ to D5M,#O the i%hts of a
Cbuilde in %ood faithC and to D9PR# those of a Clando$ne in %ood faithC as pescibed in #ticle 77). Bence, $e
shall efain fo! futhe e0a!inin% $hethe the factual situations of D5M,#O and D9PR# confo! to the
1uidical positions espectivel/ defined b/ la$, fo a Cbuilde in %ood faithC unde #ticle 77), a Cpossesso in %ood
faithC unde #ticle .2- and a Clando$ne in %ood faith: unde #ticle 77).
In e%ads to buildes in %ood faith, #ticle 77) of the "ivil "ode povides=
#RT. 77). The o$ne of the land on $hich an/thin% has been built so$n o planted in %ood faith,
shall have the i%ht
to appopiate as his o$n the $o+s, so$in% o plantin%, afte pa/!ent of the inde!nit/ povided
fo in aticles .7- and .7), o
to obli%e the one $ho built o planted to pa/ the pice of the land, and the one $ho so$ed, the
pope ent.
Bo$eve, the builde o plante cannot be obli%ed to bu/ the land if its value is consideabl/ !oe
than that of the buildin% o tees. In such case, he shall pa/ easonable ent, if the o$ne of the
land does not choose to appopiate the buildin% o tees afte pope inde!nit/. The paties
shall a%ee upon the te!s of the lease and in case of disa%ee!ent, the cout shall fi0 the te!s
theeof 6Paa%aphin% supplied8
Pusuant to the foe%oin% povision, D9PR# has the option eithe to pa/ fo the encoachin% pat of D5M,#O:s
+itchen, o to sell the encoached '7 s&uae !etes of his lot to D5M,#O. Be cannot efuse to pa/ fo the
encoachin% pat of the buildin%, and to sell the encoached pat of his land,
5
as he had !anifested befoe the
Municipal "out. ;ut that !anifestation is not bindin% because it $as !ade in a void poceedin%.
Bo$eve, the %ood faith of D5M,#O is pat of the Stipulation of Facts in the "out of Fist Instance. It $as thus
eo fo the Tial "out to have uled that D9PR# is Centitled to possession,C $ithout !oe, of the disputed
potion i!pl/in% theeb/ that he is entitled to have the +itchen e!oved. Be is entitled to such e!oval onl/
$hen, afte havin% chosen to sell his encoached land, D5M,#O fails to pa/ fo the sa!e.
6
In this case,
D5M,#O had e0pessed his $illin%ness to pa/ fo the land, but D9PR# efused to sell.
The o$ne of the buildin% eected in %ood faith on a land o$ned b/ anothe, is entitled to etain
the possession of the land until he is paid the value of his buildin%, unde aticle 7.' 6no$ #ticle
.7-8. The o$ne of the land, upon the othe hand, has the option, unde aticle '-3 6no$ #ticle
77)8, eithe to pa/ fo the buildin% o to sell his land to the o$ne of the buildin%. But he cannot
as espondents hee did refuse both to pay for the building and to sell the land and co!pel the
o$ne of the buildin% to e!ove it fo! the land $hee it eected. Be is entitled to such e!otion
onl/ $hen, afte havin% chosen to sell his land. the othe pat/ fails to pa/ fo the sa!e 6italics
ous8.
Ae hold, theefoe, that the ode of ?ud%e Natividad co!pellin% defendants-petitiones to
e!ove thei buildin%s fo! the land belon%in% to plaintiffs-espondents onl/ because the latte
chose neithe to pa/ fo such buildin%s no to sell the land, is null and void, fo it a!ends
substantiall/ the 1ud%!ent sou%ht to be e0ecuted and is. futhe!oe, offensive to aticles '-3
6no$ #ticle 77)8 and 7.' 6no$ #ticle .7-8 of the "ivil "ode. 6I%nacio vs. Bilaio, *- Phil. -(.,
-()D347-E8.
# $od anent the philosoph/ behind #ticle 77) of the "ivil ode.
The oi%inal povision $as found in #ticle '-3 of the Spanish "ivil "ode> $hich povided=
#RT. '-3. The o$ne of land on $hich an/thin% has been built, so$n o planted in %ood faith,
shall have the i%ht to appopiate as his o$n the $o+, so$in% o plantin%, afte the pa/!ent of
the inde!nit/ stated in #ticles 7.' and 7.7, o to obli%e the one $ho built o planted to pa/ the
pice of the land, and the one $ho so$ed, the pope ent.
#s $ill be seen, the #ticle favos the o$ne of the land, b/ %ivin% hi! one of the t$o options !entioned in the
#ticle. So!e co!!entatos have &uestioned the pefeence in favo of the o$ne of the land, but Manesa:s
opinion is that the #ticle is 1ust and fai.
. . . es 1usta la facultad &ue el codi%o da al dueno del suelo en el aticulo '-3, en el caso de
edificacion o plantacionF #l%unos co!entaistas la conceptuan in1usta, / co!o un e0taodinaio
pivile%io en favo de la popiedad teitoial. 9ntienden &ue i!pone el "odi%o una pena al
poseedo de buena fe / co!o adviete uno de los co!entaistas aludidos :no se ve clao el po
&ue de tal pena . . . al obli%a al &ue obo de buena fe a &uedase con el edificio o plantacion,
pevio el pa%o del teeno &ue ocupa, po&ue si bien es vedad &ue cuando edifico o planto
de!osto con este hecho, &ue &ueia paa si el edificio o plantio ta!bien lo es &ue el &ue edifico
o planto de buena fe lo hi<o en la eonea inteli%encia de ceese dueno del teeno Posible es
&ue, de sabe lo contaio, / de tene noticia de &ue habia &ue co!pa / pa%a el teeno, no se
hubiea decidido a planta ni a edifica. ,a le/ obli%andole a hacelo fue<a su voluntad, / la
fue<a po un hecho inocente de &ue no debe se esponsable:. #si poda sucede peo la
ealidad es &ue con ese hecho voluntaio, aun&ue sea inocente, se ha eni&uecido
toticea!ente con pe1uicio de oto a &uien es 1usto inde!ni<ale,
9n nuesta opinion, el "odi%o ha esuelto el conflicto de la !anea !as 1usta / e&uitativa /
espetando en lo possible el pincipio &ue paa la accesion se establece en el at. '.).
7

Ou o$n "ode "o!!ission !ust have ta+en account of the ob1ections to #ticle '-3 of the Spanish "ivil "ode.
Bence, the "o!!ission povided a !odification theeof, and #ticle 77) of ou "ode has been !ade to povide=
#RT. 77). The o$ne of the land on $hich an/thin% has been built, so$n o planted in %ood faith,
shall have the i%ht to appopiate as his o$n the $o+s, so$in% o plantin%, afte pa/!ent of the
inde!nit/ povided fo in aticles .7- and .7), o to obli%e the one $ho built o planted to pa/
the pice of the land, and the one $ho so$ed, the pope ent. Bo$eve, the builde o plante
cannot be obli%ed to bu/ the land if its value is consideabl/ !oe than that of the buildin% o
tees. In such case, he shall pa/ easonable ent, if the o$ne of the land does not choose to
appopiate the buildin% o tees afte pope inde!nit/. The paties shall a%ee upon the te!s
of the lease and in case of disa%ee!ent, the cout shall fi0 the te!s theeof.
#dditional benefits $ee e0tended to the builde but the lando$ne etained his options.
The fainess of the ules in #ticle 77) has also been e0plained as follo$s=
Ahee the builde, plante o so$e has acted in %ood faith, a conflict of i%hts aises bet$een
the o$nes, and it beco!es necessa/ to potect the o$ne of the i!pove!ents $ithout causin%
in1ustice to the o$ne of the land. In vie$ of the i!pacticabilit/ of ceatin% a state of foced co-
o$neship, the la$ has povided a 1ust solution b/ %ivin% the o$ne of the land the option to
ac&uie the i!pove!ents afte pa/!ent of the pope inde!nit/, o to obli%e the builde o
plante to pa/ fo the land and the so$e to pa/ fo the pope ent. It is the o$ne of the land
$ho is authoi<ed to e0ecise the option, because his i%ht is olde, and because, b/ the pinciple
of accession, he is entitled to the o$neship of the accesso/ thin%. 6' Manesa 23'> ;enado
vs. ;ataclan, '* Off. Ga<. 3')2> "o Tao vs. "han "hico, G.R. No. 743-*, #pil '(, 3474> #ticle
applied= see "abal, et al vs. Ibane< DS.".E .2 Off. Ga<. 23*> Mafoi vs. Velasco, D".#.E .2 Off.
Ga<. 2(.(8.
8

AB9R9FOR9, the 1ud%!ent of the tial "out is heeb/ set aside, and this case is heeb/ odeed e!anded to
the Re%ional Tial "out of Iloilo fo futhe poceedin%s consistent $ith #ticles 77) and .7- of the "ivil "ode, as
follo$s=
3. The tial "out shall dete!ine
a8 the pesent fai pice of D9PR#:s '7 s&uae !ete aea of land>
b8 the a!ount of the e0penses spent b/ D5M,#O fo the buildin% of the +itchen>
c8 the incease in value 6Cplus valueC8 $hich the said aea of '7 s&uae !etes !a/ have
ac&uied b/ eason theeof, and
d8 $hethe the value of said aea of land is consideabl/ !oe than that of the +itchen built
theeon.
2. #fte said a!ounts shall have been dete!ined b/ co!petent evidence, the Re%ional, Tial "out shall ende
1ud%!ent, as follo$s=
a8 The tial "out shall %ant D9PR# a peiod of fifteen 63.8 da/s $ithin $hich to e0ecise his
option unde the la$ 6#ticle 77), "ivil "ode8, $hethe to appopiate the +itchen as his o$n b/
pa/in% to D5M,#O eithe the a!ount of tile e0penses spent b/ D5M,#O f o the buildin% of the
+itchen, o the incease in value 6Cplus valueC8 $hich the said aea of '7 s&uae !etes !a/
have ac&uied b/ eason theeof, o to obli%e D5M,#O to pa/ the pice of said aea. The
a!ounts to be espectivel/ paid b/ D5M,#O and D9PR#, in accodance $ith the option thus
e0ecised b/ $itten notice of the othe pat/ and to the "out, shall be paid b/ the obli%o $ithin
fifteen 63.8 da/s fo! such notice of the option b/ tendein% the a!ount to the "out in favo of
the pat/ entitled to eceive it>
b8 The tial "out shall futhe ode that if D9PR# e0ecises the option to obli%e D5M,#O to pa/
the pice of the land but the latte e1ects such puchase because, as found b/ the tial "out, the
value of the land is consideabl/ !oe than that of the +itchen, D5M,#O shall %ive $itten notice
of such e1ection to D9PR# and to the "out $ithin fifteen 63.8 da/s fo! notice of D9PR#:s
option to sell the land. In that event, the paties shall be %iven a peiod of fifteen 63.8 da/s fo!
such notice of e1ection $ithin $hich to a%ee upon the te!s of the lease, and %ive the "out
fo!al $itten notice of such a%ee!ent and its povisos. If no a%ee!ent is eached b/ the
paties, the tial "out, $ithin fifteen 63.8 da/s fo! and afte the te!ination of the said peiod
fi0ed fo ne%otiation, shall then fi0 the te!s of the lease, povided that the !onthl/ ental to be
fi0ed b/ the "out shall not be less than Ten Pesos 6P3(.((8 pe !onth, pa/able $ithin the fist
five 6.8 da/s of each calenda !onth. The peiod fo the foced lease shall not be !oe than t$o
628 /eas, counted fo! the finalit/ of the 1ud%!ent, considein% the lon% peiod of ti!e since
34.2 that D5M,#O has occupied the sub1ect aea. The ental thus fi0ed shall be inceased b/
ten pecent 63(H8 fo the second /ea of the foced lease. D5M,#O shall not !a+e an/ futhe
constuctions o i!pove!ents on the +itchen. 5pon e0piation of the t$o-/ea peiod, o upon
default b/ D5M,#O in the pa/!ent of entals fo t$o 628 consecutive !onths, D9PR# shall be
entitled to te!inate the foced lease, to ecove his land, and to have the +itchen e!oved b/
D5M,#O o at the latte:s e0pense. The entals heein povided shall be tendeed b/ D5M,#O
to the "out fo pa/!ent to D9PR#, and such tende shall constitute evidence of $hethe o not
co!pliance $as !ade $ithin the peiod fi0ed b/ the "out.
c8 In an/ event, D5M,#O shall pa/ D9PR# an a!ount co!puted at Ten Pesos 6P3(.((8 pe
!onth as easonable co!pensation fo the occupanc/ of D9PR#:s land fo the peiod counted
fo! 34.2, the /ea D5M,#O occupied the sub1ect aea, up to the co!!ence!ent date of the
foced lease efeed to in the pecedin% paa%aph>
d8 The peiods to be fi0ed b/ the tial "out in its Pecision shall be ine0tendible, and upon failue
of the pat/ obli%ed to tende to the tial "out the a!ount due to the obli%ee, the pat/ entitled to
such pa/!ent shall be entitled to an ode of e0ecution fo the enfoce!ent of pa/!ent of the
a!ount due and fo co!pliance $ith such othe acts as !a/ be e&uied b/ the pestation due
the obli%ee.
No costs,
SO ORD9R9D.
Teehankee !ctg. ".#. $lana Relova De la %uente and !lampay ##. concur.
&utierre' #r. " #. too+ no pat.


Foo#$o#%&
3 CRule *(
Focible 9nt/ and Detaine
CSec. *. ?ud%!ent conclusive onl/ on possession> not conclusive in actions involvin% title o
o$neship. The 1ud%!ent endeed in an action fo focible ent/ o detaine shall be effective
$ith espect to the possession onl/ and in no $ise bind the title o affect the o$neship of the
land o buildin%. Such 1ud%!ent shall not ba an action bet$een the sa!e paties espectin% title
to the land o buildin%, no shall it be held conclusive of the facts theein found in a case bet$een
the sa!e paties upon a diffeent cause of action not involvin% possession.C
2 CSec. 77. Oi%inal 1uisdiction. ...
6b8 In all civil actions $hich involve the title to, o possession of eal popet/, o an/ inteest
theein, o the le%alit/ of an/ ta0, i!pose o assess!ent, e0cept actions of focible ent/ into and
detaine on lands o buildin%s, oi%inal 1uisdiction of $hich is confeed b/ this #ct upon cit/ and
!unicipal couts> C
' CSec. 34. ?uisdiction in civil ease ...
628 In all civil actions $hich involve the title to, o possession of, eal popet/, o an/ inteest
theein, e0cept actions fo focible ent/ into and unla$ful detaine of lands o buildin%s, oi%inal
1uisdiction ove $hich is confeed upon Metopolitan Tial "outs, Municipal Tial "outs, and
Municipal "icuit Tial "outs>
7 (upra.
. I%nacio vs. Bilaio, *- Phil. -(. 6347-8.
- )bid.
* ' Manesa, *th 9d., pp. '((-'(3.
) II Tolentino, "ivil "ode of the Philippines, 34-' ed., p. 4*.
I M. ?ustice Bu%o 9. Gutiee<, ?. too+ no pat, havin% been one of the t$o !e!bes of a "out
of #ppeals: Division of Five ?ustices $ho dissented fo! the !a1oit/ opinion cetif/in% this case
to this "out.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
9N ;#N"
G.R. No. L-1!486 A'('&# 31, 196)
LEONOR GRANA a$* +ULIETA TORRAL,A, petitiones,
vs.
TE COURT OF APPEALS, AURORA ,ONGATO a$* +ARDENIO SANCE-, espondents.
Tran*uilino +. "alo #r. for petitioners.
,.D. -ercado #.V. +ng and #.T. &on'ales for respondents.
GUTIERRE- DA.ID, J./
This is a petition to evie$ on certiorari a decision of the "out of #ppeals.
,eono Gana and ?ulieta Toalba, defendants belo$ and heein petitiones, $ee on #pil 3', 34.3 sued b/
#uoa ;on%ato and ?adenio Sanche<, espondents heein, befoe the "out of Fist Instance of #%usan, fo the
ecove/ of )* s&uae !etes of esidential land. #fte tial, the cout endeed 1ud%!ent declain% the plaintiffs,
heein espondents, o$nes of the land in contoves/ and odein% petitiones to vacate and delive it to said
espondents and to pa/ a !onthl/ ental of P3(.(( fo! the filin% of the co!plaint until the/ actuall/ vacate the
sa!e, plus attone/:s fees and costs. The decision, on appeal, havin% been affi!ed b/ the "out of #ppeals
$ith the onl/ !odification of disallo$in% the a$ad fo attone/:s fees, petitiones bou%ht the case to this "out
thou%h the pesent petition fo evie$.
The ecod discloses that so!eti!e in 34(4 a cadastal suve/ of ;utuan, #%usan, $as !ade b/ the ;ueau of
,ands. In that suve/, the pacel of land hee in &uestion $as included as pat of the lot belon%in% to Ge%oio
;on%ato and "laa ;otcon fo $hich Oi%inal "etificate of Title No. RO-*2 63')8 $as issued in thei favo on
Febua/ 32, 342'. On Nove!be 2., 34'', this lot $as puchased b/ the spouses Macos ;on%ato and
9usebia Moe, and upon thei death, the land $as inheited b/ the espondents #uoa ;on%ato and ?adenio
Sanche<, the fo!e bein% the dau%hte of Macos ;on%ato b/ his fist !aia%e $hile the latte is the son of
9usebia Moe also b/ he fist !aia%e.
Petitiones clai! that the lands in ;utuan $ee subse&uentl/ esuve/ed due to conflicts and ovelappin% of
boundaies. In that esuve/ 6TS--. ;utuan "adaste8, Ge%oio ;on%ato:s lot, accodin% to petitiones, $as
identified as ,ot No. '33 and that of Isidaia Tillo, thei pedecesso in inteest, as ,ot No. '3(. "itin% the fact
that Oi%inal "etificate of Title No. RO-*2 63')8 coves 24. s&uae !etes of land, $hile the s+etch plan of the
second cadastal suve/ of ;utuan sho$s that ,ot No. '33 has onl/ 2'( s&uae !etes, petitiones !aintain that
it is the latte aea popel/ belon%s to espondents and that the land in &uestion is pat of the ad1oinin% land, ,ot
No. '3(, $hich belon%ed to thei pedecesso in inteest.
Petitiones: stand is untenable. No poof $as pesented to sho$ that the fist suve/ $as eoneous o that it
included pat of the conti%ous land of petitiones: pedecesso in inteest as pat of the lot no$ coveed b/
Oi%inal "etificate of Title No. RO-*2 63')8. Note that the diffeence in aea bet$een the land coveed b/ said
title and ,ot No. '33 of the esuve/ plan is -. s&uae !etes $hile the aea of the land in dispute if )* s&uae
!etes. #nd $hat is !oe, the alle%ed s+etch plan of the esuve/ $as not pesented in evidence.
5pon the othe hand, it is not disputed that the land in &uestion is pat of the lot coveed b/ the Toens title
issued $a/ bac+ in 342' in the na!e of espondents: pedecesso in inteest. Said title has not been contested
up to the pesent, and, theefoe, has beco!e inconvetible evidence of the o$neship of the land coveed b/ it.
Aell settled is the ule that a Toens cetificate of title beco!es conclusive and indefeasible afte the lapse of the
peiod $ithin $hich it !a/ be i!pu%ned 6Re/es, et al. vs. ;obon, et al., .( Phil., *43> Ju!ul vs. Rivea, et al.,
-7 Phil., 3'8.
Petitiones: contention that the "out of #ppeals eed in not %antin% thei !otion fo ne$ tial on the %ound of
ne$l/ discoveed evidence, li+e$ise, cannot be sustained. The ne$ evidence sou%ht to be intoduced $as the
s+etch plan of the second suve/, $hich, $ith the e!plo/!ent of easonable dili%ence $ould have easil/ been
discoveed and poduced at the tial. #n/$a/, even if pesented at the esult of the case. If a subse&uent
cetificate of title cannot be pe!itted to pevail ove a pevious Toens title 6Re/es, et al, vs. ;obon, et al.,
supra8 $ith !oe eason should a esuve/ plan not to be allo$ed to alte o !odif/ such title so as to !a+e the
aea of the land theein descibed a%ee $ith that %iven in the plan. 6See Goven!ent of the Philippines vs.
#ias, '- Phil., 34.8.
#lthou%h $ithout an/ le%al and valid clai! ove the land in &uestion, petitiones, ho$eve, $ee found b/ the
"out of #ppeals to have constucted a potion of thei house theeon in %ood faith. 5nde #ticle '-3 of the old
"ivil "ode 6#ticle 77) of the ne$8, the o$ne of the land on $hich an/thin% has been built in %ood faith shall
have the i%ht to appopiate as his o$n faith shall have the i%ht to appopiate as his o$n the buildin%, afte
pa/!ent to the builde of necessa/ and useful e0penses, and in the pope case, e0penses fo pue lu0u/ o
!ee pleasue, o to obli%e the builde to pa/ the pice of the land. Respondents, as o$nes of the land, have
theefoe the choice of eithe appopiatin% the potion of petitiones: house $hich is on thei land upon pa/!ent
of the pope inde!nit/ to petitiones, o sellin% to petitiones that pat of thei land on $hich stands the
i!pove!ent. It !a/ hee be pointed out that it $ould be i!pactical fo espondents to choose to e0ecise the
fist altenative, i.e., bu/ that potion of the house standin% on thei land, fo in that event the $hole buildin%
!i%ht be endeed useless. The !oe $o+able solution, it $ould see!, is fo espondents to sell to petitiones
that pat of thei land on $hich $as constucted a potion of the latte:s house. If petitiones ae un$illin% o
unable to bu/, then the/ !ust vacate the land and !ust pa/ entals until the/ do so. Of couse, espondents
cannot obli%e petitiones to bu/ the land if its value is consideabl/ !oe than that of the afoe!entioned potion
of the house. If such be the case, then petitiones !ust pa/ easonable ent. The paties !ust co!e to an
a%ee!ent as to the conditions of the lease, and should the/ fail to do so, then the cout shall fi0 the sa!e.
6#ticle '-3, old "ivil "ode> #ticle 77) of the ne$8.
In this connection, the appellate cout eed in odein% petitiones to pa/ !onthl/ entals of P3(.(( fo! the date
of filin% of the co!plaint until the/ actuall/ vacate said land. # builde in %ood faith !a/ not be e&uied to pa/
entals. Be has a i%ht to etain the land on $hich he has built in %ood faith until he is ei!bused the e0penses
incued b/ hi!. 6Mianda vs. Fadullon, et al., 4* Phil., )(3> .3 Off. Ga<., -22-, see also Matine< vs. ;a%anus,
2) Phil., .((> De Gu<!an vs. De la Fuente, .. Phil., .(3> Kasila% vs. Rodi%ue<, Off. Ga<., Supp., #u%ust 3-,
3473, p. 27*8.
Petitiones futhe contend that he co!plaint should have been dis!issed fo non1oinde of an indispensable
pat/, it bein% alle%ed that thei !othe Maia "upin, $ho o$ns the land in &uestion as pat of he ,ot No. '3(,
has not been !ade a pat/ defendant in the case. This contention, $hich $as not aised in the tial cout,
deseves scant consideation. Petitiones cleal/ asseted o$neship ove the land in dispute as $ell as ove ,ot
No. '3( in thei ans$e to the co!plaint. The/ ae conse&uentl/ estopped fo! alle%in% othe$ise.
#s to petitiones: assetion that the/ should have been a$aded da!a%es alle%ed to have been suffeed b/ the!
in thei counteclai!, suffice it to sa/ that petitiones failed to pove that the/ suffeed an/ da!a%e at all b/
eason of the filin% of the co!plaint. Indeed, in the li%ht of the vie$ $e have ta+en of the case, the/ could not
have substantiated thei clai! fo da!a%es.
In vie$ of the foe%oin%, the appealed decision is !odified in the sense that espondents ae heeb/ diected to
e0ecise $ithin '( da/s fo! this decision thei option to eithe bu/ the potion of the petitiones: house on thei
land o sell to said petitiones the potion of thei land and petitiones ae un$illin% o unable to bu/, then the/
!ust vacate the sa!e and !ust pa/ easonable ent of P3(.(( !onthl/ fo! the ti!e espondents !ade thei
choice up to the ti!e the/ actuall/ vacate the pe!ises. ;ut if the value of the eland is consideabl/ !oe than
the value of the i!pove!ent, then petitiones !a/ elect to ent the land, in $hich case the paties shall a%ee
upon the te!s of a lease. Should the/ disa%ee, the cout of oi%in is heeb/ instucted to intevene and fi0 the
te!s theeof. Petitiones shall pa/ easonable ent of P3(.(( !onthl/ up to the ti!e the paties a%ee on the
te!s of the lease o until the cut fi0es such te!s.
So odeed $ithout ponounce!ent as to costs.
$aras ".#. Beng'on Bautista !ngelo .abrador "oncepcion Reyes #.B... Barrera and Di'on ##. concu.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
FIRST DIVISION
DG.R. No. 37424.. Septe!be 2', 2(('E
PBI,IPPIN9 N#TION#, ;#NK, petitioner
vs.
G9N9ROSO D9 ?9S5S, epesented b/ his #ttone/-in-Fact, "BRISTI#N D9 ?9S5S, respondent.
D 9 " I S I O N
VIT5G, #.=
Petitione Philippine National ;an+ disputes the decision handed do$n b/ the "out of #ppeals po!ul%ated on
2' Mach 2((3 in "#-G.R. "V No. .-((3, entitled LGeneoso De ?esus, epesented b/ his #ttone/-in-Fact,
"histian De ?esus, vesus Philippine National ;an+.M The assailed decision has affi!ed the 1ud%!ent
endeed b/ the Re%ional Tial "out, ;anch 77, of Ma!buao, Occidental Mindoo, declain% espondent
Geneoso de ?esus as bein% the tue and la$ful o$ne of the 327-s&uae-!ete potion of the land coveed b/
Tansfe "etificate of Title 6T"T8 No. T-3*34* and odein% petitione ban+ to vacate the pe!ises, to delive
possession theeof to espondent, and to e!ove the i!pove!ent theeon.
It $ould appea that on 3( ?une 344., espondent filed a co!plaint a%ainst petitione befoe the Re%ional Tial
"out of Occidental Mindoo fo ecove/ of o$neship and possession, $ith da!a%es, ove the &uestioned
popet/. In his co!plaint, espondent stated that he had ac&uied a pacel of land situated in Ma!buao,
Occidental Mindoo, $ith an aea of 3,377 s&uae !etes coveed b/ T"T No. T-3*34*, and that on 2- Mach
344', he had caused a veification suve/ of the popet/ and discoveed that the nothen potion of the lot $as
bein% encoached upon b/ a buildin% of petitione to the e0tent of 327 s&uae !etes. Despite t$o lettes of
de!and sent b/ espondent, petitione failed and efused to vacate the aea.
Petitione, in its ans$e, asseted that $hen it ac&uied the lot and the buildin% so!eti!e in 34)3 fo! then
Ma/o ;ienvenido I%nacio, the encoach!ent alead/ $as in e0istence and to e!ed/ the situation, Ma/o
I%nacio offeed to sell the aea in &uestion 6$hich then also belon%ed to I%nacio8 to petitione at P3((.(( pe
s&uae !ete $hich offe the latte clai!ed to have accepted. The sale, ho$eve, did not !ateiali<e $hen,
$ithout the +no$led%e and consent of petitione, Ma/o I%nacio late !ot%a%ed the lot to the Develop!ent ;an+
of the Philippines.
The tial cout decided the case in favo of espondent declain% hi! to be the i%htful o$ne of the disputed 327-
s&uae-!ete potion of the lot and odein% petitione to suende possession of the popet/ to espondent and
to cause, at its e0pense, the e!oval of an/ i!pove!ent theeon.
The "out of #ppeals, on appeal, sustained the tial cout but it odeed to be deleted the a$ad to espondent of
attone/Ns fees, as $ell as !oal and e0e!pla/ da!a%es, and liti%ation e0penses.
Petitione $ent to this "out, via a petition fo evie$, afte the appellate cout had denied the ban+Ns !otion fo
econsideation, hee no$ contendin% that -
L3. TB9 "O5RT OF #PP9#,S GR#V9,J 9RR9D IN ,#A IN #D?5DGING PN; # ;5I,D9R IN ;#D F#ITB
OV9R TB9 9N"RO#"B9D PROP9RTJ IN @59STION>
L2. TB9 "O5RT OF #PP9#,S GR#V9,J 9RR9D IN ,#A IN NOT #PP,JING IN F#VOR OF PN; TB9
PROVISION OF #RTI",9 77) OF TB9 "IVI, "OD9 #ND TB9 R5,ING IN T9"NOG#S PBI,IPPIN9S
M#N5F#"T5RING "ORP. VS. "O5RT OF #PP9#,S, G.R. No. 3())47, Febua/ 3(, 344*, 2-) S"R# *.MD3E
The Re%ional Tial "out and the "out of #ppeals have both e1ected the idea that petitione can be consideed
a builde in %ood faith. In the conte0t that such te! is used in paticula efeence to #ticle 77), et se&., of the
"ivil "ode, a builde in %ood faith is one $ho, not bein% the o$ne of the land, builds on that land believin%
hi!self to be its o$ne and una$ae of an/ defect in his title o !ode of ac&uisition.
The vaious povisions of the "ivil "ode, petinent to the sub1ect, ead=
L#ticle 77). The o$ne of the land on $hich an/thin% has been built, so$n, o planted in %ood faith, shall have
the i%ht to appopiate as his o$n the $o+s, so$in% o plantin%, afte pa/!ent of the inde!nit/ povided fo in
#ticles .7- and .7), o to obli%e the one $ho built o planted to pa/ the pice of the land, and the one $ho
so$ed, the pope ent. Bo$eve, the builde o plante cannot be obli%ed to bu/ the land if its value is
consideabl/ !oe than that of the buildin% o tees. In such a case, he shall pa/ easonable ent, if the o$ne of
the land does not choose to appopiate the buildin% o tees afte pope inde!nit/. The paties shall a%ee
upon the te!s of the lease and in case of disa%ee!ent, the cout shall fi0 the te!s theeof.M
L#ticle 774. Be $ho builds, plants, o so$s in bad faith on the land of anothe, loses $hat is built, planted o
so$n $ithout i%ht to inde!nit/.M
L#ticle 7.(. The o$ne of the land on $hich an/thin% has been built, planted o so$n in bad faith !a/ de!and
the de!olition of the $o+, o that the plantin% o so$in% be e!oved, in ode to eplace thin%s in thei fo!e
condition at the e0pense of the peson $ho built, planted o so$ed> o he !a/ co!pel the builde o plante to
pa/ the pice of the land, and the so$e the pope ent.M
# builde in %ood faith can, unde the foe%oin% povisions, co!pel the lando$ne to !a+e a choice bet$een
appopiatin% the buildin% b/ pa/in% the pope inde!nit/ o obli%in% the builde to pa/ the pice of the land. The
choice belon%s to the o$ne of the land, a ule that accods $ith the pinciple of accession, i.e., that the
accesso/ follo$s the pincipal and not the othe $a/ aound.D2E 9ven as the option lies $ith the lando$ne, the
%ant to hi!, nevetheless, is peclusive. Be !uch choose one. Be cannot, fo instance, co!pel the o$ne of
the buildin% to instead e!ove it fo! the land.D'E In ode, ho$eve, that the builde can invo+e that accuin%
benefit and en1o/ his coespondin% i%ht to de!and that a choice be !ade b/ the lando$ne, he should be able
to pove %ood faith on his pat.
Good faith, hee undestood, is an intan%ible and abstact &ualit/ $ith no technical !eanin% o statuto/
definition, and it enco!passes, a!on% othe thin%s, an honest belief, the absence of !alice and the absence of
desi%n to defaud o to see+ an unconscionable advanta%e. #n individualNs pesonal %ood faith is a concept of
his o$n !ind and, theefoe, !a/ not conclusivel/ be dete!ined b/ his potestations alone. It i!plies honest/
of intention, and feedo! fo! +no$led%e of cicu!stances $hich ou%ht to put the holde upon in&ui/.D7E The
essence of %ood faith lies in an honest belief in the validit/ of oneNs i%ht, i%noance of a supeio clai!, and
absence of intention to oveeach anothe.D.E #pplied to possession, one is consideed in %ood faith if he is not
a$ae that thee e0ists in his title o !ode of ac&uisition an/ fla$ $hich invalidates it.D-E
Given the findin%s of both the tial cout and the appellate cout, it should be evident enou%h that petitione $ould
fall !uch too shot fo! its clai! of %ood faith. 9videntl/, petitione $as &uite a$ae, and indeed advised, pio
to its ac&uisition of the land and buildin% fo! I%nacio that a pat of the buildin% sold to it stood on the land not
coveed b/ the land conve/ed to it.
9&uall/ si%nificant is the fact that the buildin%, constucted on the land b/ I%nacio, has in actualit/ been pat of
the popet/ tansfeed to petitione. #ticle 77), of the "ivil "ode efes to a piece of land $hose o$neship is
clai!ed b/ t$o o !oe paties, one of $ho! has built so!e $o+s 6o so$n o planted so!ethin%8 and not #o a
0a&% 12%3% #2% o1$%3 o4 #2% 5a$* 6& #2% 7'65*%3, &o1%3, o3 85a$#%3 12o #2%$ 5a#%3 5o&%& o1$%3&268 o4 #2%
5a$* 7y &a5% o3 o#2%316&% 4o3, %5&%16&% &#a#%*, 912%3% #2% #3'% o1$%3 26:&%54 6& #2% 7'65*%3 o4 1o3;& o$
26& o1$ 5a$*, #2% 6&&'% o4 (oo* 4a6#2 o3 7a* 4a6#2 6& %$#63%5y 633%5%<a$#.= D*E
In fine, petitione is not in a valid position to invo+e the povisions of #ticle 77) of the "ivil "ode. The "out
co!!iseates $ith petitione in its pesent pedica!ent> upon the othe hand, espondent, too, is entitled to his
i%hts unde the la$, paticulal/ afte havin% lon% been depived of the en1o/!ent of his popet/. Nevetheless,
the "out e0pesses hope that the paties $ill still be able to co!e up $ith an aan%e!ent that can be !utuall/
suitable and acceptable to the!.
>EREFORE, the decision of the "out of #ppeals in "#-G.R. "V No. .-((3 is #FFIRM9D. No costs.
SO ORD9R9D.
Davide, ?., ".?., 6"hai!an8, Jnaes-Santia%o, and "apio, ??., concu.
#<cuna, ?., on sic+ leave.
D3E Rollo, p. 32.
D2E Depa vs. Du!lao, G.R. No. ,-.*'7), 3- Ma/ 34)., 3'- S"R# 7*..
D'E I%nacio vs. Bilaio, *- Phil. -(.> Sa!iento vs. #%ana, G.R. No. ,-.*2)), '( #pil 34)7, 324 S"R# 322>
Tecno%as Philippines Manufactuin% "op. vs . "out of #ppeals, G.R. No. 3())47, 3( Febua/ 344*, 2-) S"R#
*.
D7E ;lac+Ns ,a$ Dictiona/, #bid%ed Fifth 9dition, p. '.'.
D.E ;enado vs. ;enado, 4- Phil. 2(2> Ne%ete vs. "FI of Maindu&ue, G.R. No. ,-'32-*, 27 Nove!be 34*2,
7) S"R# 33'.
D-E #ticle .2-, "ivil "ode of the Philippines.
D*E Pecson vs. "out of #ppeals, G.R. No. 33.)37, 2- Ma/ 344., 277 S"R# 7(*.
#ssi%n!ent=
3. "iti&ue on decisions bet$een D9PR# v. Du!lao and Gana v. "#.
2. "o!!ent on decision in PN; v. De ?esus.