Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 88 views

    Case Digest - G.R. No. L-8139 October 24, 1955

    Uploaded by

    Zapterranosaurus
    - Maria Lim owned two lots that she offered to Atty. Joaquin Yuseco and his wife Rosario Yuseco to build a house and servant's quarters on, which they did. Shortly before her death, Maria sold the lots to her daughter Belen Uy Tayag for P4,000. Belen and her husband Jesus Tayag then asked the Yusecos to remove their buildings or pay rent, which the Yusecos did not do. Belen and Jesus filed an ejectment case against the Yusecos. - The Court of Appeals found the Yusecos to be builders in good faith. The case was remanded to give Belen and Jesus the choice

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Case Digest - G.R. No. L-8139 October 24, 1955

    Uploaded by

    Zapterranosaurus
    88 views1 page
    - Maria Lim owned two lots that she offered to Atty. Joaquin Yuseco and his wife Rosario Yuseco to build a house and servant's quarters on, which they did. Shortly before her death, Maria sold the lots to her daughter Belen Uy Tayag for P4,000. Belen and her husband Jesus Tayag then asked the Yusecos to remove their buildings or pay rent, which the Yusecos did not do. Belen and Jesus filed an ejectment case against the Yusecos. - The Court of Appeals found the Yusecos to be builders in good faith. The case was remanded to give Belen and Jesus the choice

    Original Description:

    Law On Property - When Art. 448 May be Applied in Ejectment Cases

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Maria Lim owned two lots that she offered to Atty. Joaquin Yuseco and his wife Rosario Yuseco to build a house and servant's quarters on, which they did. Shortly before her death, Maria sold the lots to her daughter Belen Uy Tayag for P4,000. Belen and her husband Jesus Tayag then asked the Yusecos to remove their buildings or pay rent, which the Yusecos did not do. Belen and Jesus filed an ejectment case against the Yusecos. - The Court of Appeals found the Yusecos to be builders in good faith. The case was remanded to give Belen and Jesus the choice

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    88 views1 page

    Case Digest - G.R. No. L-8139 October 24, 1955

    Uploaded by

    Zapterranosaurus
    - Maria Lim owned two lots that she offered to Atty. Joaquin Yuseco and his wife Rosario Yuseco to build a house and servant's quarters on, which they did. Shortly before her death, Maria sold the lots to her daughter Belen Uy Tayag for P4,000. Belen and her husband Jesus Tayag then asked the Yusecos to remove their buildings or pay rent, which the Yusecos did not do. Belen and Jesus filed an ejectment case against the Yusecos. - The Court of Appeals found the Yusecos to be builders in good faith. The case was remanded to give Belen and Jesus the choice

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    G.R. No.

    L-8139      October 24, 1955

    BELEN UY TAYAG and JESUS B. TAYAG, petitioners,


    vs.
    ROSARIO YUSECO, JOAQUIN C. YUSECO and THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents.
    Pelaez and Jalandoni for petitioners.
    Yuseco, Abdon, Yuseco and Narvasa for respondents.

    FACTS OF THE CASE:

     In and prior to the year 1930 Atty. Joaquin C. Yuseco had been rendering professional services to Maria
    Lim, owner of lots 11-A and 11-B, block 2251 of the Government Subdivision known as Hacienda de San Lazaro
    covered by transfer certificates of title Nos. 36400 and 36401 of the Register of Deeds of Manila. To show her
    appreciation of the service rendered to her Maria offered the two lots to Atty. Yuseco and his wife Rosario Yuseco
    for them to build on, and accepting the offer, the Yusecos built a house and an annex for servant’s quarters on the
    two lots which improvements at present may be reasonably valued at P50,000. Although Atty. Yuseco claims that
    the two lots were donated to him, he could exhibit no evidence of said donation and the certificates of title already
    mentioned remained in the name of Maria.

    On November 29, 1945, a few days before her death, Maria sold the two lots to her daughter Belen Uy
    married to Jesus B. Tayag for and in consideration of the sum of P4,000. The new owners in 1946 asked the
    Yusecos to remove their houses from the land because Belen and her husband planned to build their own house
    on the two lots, or else pay a monthly rent of P120. Because of the failure of the Yusecos to comply with the
    demand, Belen assisted by her husband filed an action of ejectment in the Municipal Court of Manila which later
    rendered judgment for the plaintiffs and against the defendants "for the restitution of the premises described in the
    complaint and for the recovery of a monthly rental of P100 from November 30, 1945, up to the date of restitution,
    and for cost."

    ISSUE OF THE CASE:

    1. Is it possible to have a choice irrevocable under Article 448 of the New Civil Code?

    COURT RULING:

    Petitioners insist that the relation between them and the respondents is that of lessor and lessee and in
    support of their contention they point to the contract of lease between Maria Lim and the Yusecos executed in
    1930. As already stated, the Court of Appeals found respondents to be builders in good faith and that finding is
    conclusive.

    Affirming the decision of the Court of Appeals in so far as it finds and declares respondents to be
    possessors in good faith, let this case be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings, particularly to give an
    opportunity to plaintiffs-petitioners to exercise their choice and option; and for purposes of said choice and option
    the trial court will admit evidence and make a finding as to the amount of the useful expenditures or "the increase
    in value which the thing has acquired by reason thereof", under article 453 of the old Civil Code, to be refunded or
    paid by the petitioners should they choose to appropriate the buildings; "the value of the land" under article 361 of
    the same Code, to be paid by the defendants-respondents in case plaintiffs-petitioner elect to compel them to buy
    the land. No costs.

    You might also like