This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2006-02-09 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Petitioner also invokes our ruling in Garcia v. Court of Appeals[9] that the owner's successor-in-interest must respect an existing contract of lease. Any attempt to eject the lessee within the period of lease constitutes a breach of contract. | |||||
|
2001-04-19 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| On 1 April 1997 the MTC thus ordered petitioner and all persons claiming under him to immediately vacate and surrender possession of Rm. No. 308 and Stall No. 561 of the NBC, and to pay the current monthly rental of P12,938.20 as reasonable compensation for the continued use and occupancy thereof from April 1996 until he finally vacated and surrendered possession to private respondents as well as to pay attorney's fees of P5,000.00 and the costs.[7] On 16 October 1997 the Regional Trial Court affirmed the Decision of the lower court.[8] As regards the fifth issue, it elaborated that the demand sent by respondent Chua on 4 December 1995 was sufficient compliance with the rules for filing an ejectment suit. It cited Garcia v. Court of Appeals[9] where this Court ruled that when the former owner of the leased estate already sent a notice to vacate, the buyer thereof need not send another notice before filing the ejectment suit. | |||||