Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

RUBEN C. CORPUZ v. SPS. HILARION AGUSTIN AND JUSTA AGUSTIN

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 176055 2014-03-17	SPS. EDMUNDO DELA CRUZ AND AMELIA CONCIO-DELA CRUZ v. SPS. RUFINO R. CAPCO AND MARTY C. CAPCO DEL CASTILLO, J.
"The only issue in an ejectment case is the physical possession of real property possession de facto and not possession de jure."[45] But "[w]here the parties to an ejectment case raise the issue of ownership, the courts may pass upon that issue to determine who between the parties has the better right to possess the property."[46] Here, both parties anchor their right to possess based on ownership, i.e., the spouses Dela Cruz by their own ownership while the spouses Capco by the ownership of Rufino as one of the heirs of the alleged true owner of the property. Thus, the MeTC and the RTC correctly passed upon the issue of ownership in this case to determine the issue of possession. However, it must be emphasized that "[t]he adjudication of the issue of ownership is only provisional, and not a bar to an action between the same parties involving title to the property."[47]
	GR No. 187944 2014-03-12	CARMENCITA SUAREZ v. MR. REYES, J.
"Without a doubt, the registered owner of real property is entitled to its possession. However, the owner cannot simply wrest possession thereof from whoever is in actual occupation of the property. To recover possession, he must resort to the proper judicial remedy and, once he chooses what action to file, he is required to satisfy the conditions necessary for such action to prosper."[37]
	GR No. 184079 2013-04-17	SPS. ARMANDO SILVERIO v. SPS. RICARDO AND EVELYN MARCELO VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Unlawful detainer is an action to recover possession of real property from one who illegally withholds possession after the expiration or termination of his right to hold possession under any contract, express or implied. The possession of the defendant in unlawful detainer is originally legal but became illegal due to the expiration or termination of the right to possess.[36] In an unlawful detainer case, the sole issue for resolution is physical or material possession of the property involved, independent of any claim of ownership by any of the parties. Where the issue of ownership is raised by any of the parties, the courts may pass upon the same in order to determine who has the right to possess the property. The adjudication is, however, merely provisional and would not bar or prejudice an action between the same parties involving title to the property.[37]