This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2011-04-06 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| From the above discussion, it is not difficult to see that the question of possession is so intertwined with the question of ownership to the effect that the question of possession cannot be resolved without resolving the question of ownership. This is the reason why we are upholding the CA's resolution of the issue of ownership in this ejectment case. "It bears emphasizing that in ejectment suits, the only issue for resolution is the physical or material possession of the property involved, independent of any claim of ownership by any of the party litigants."[35] However, "[i]n cases where defendant raises the question of ownership in the pleadings and the question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the court may proceed and resolve the issue of ownership but only for the purpose of determining the issue of possession. [Nevertheless], the disposition of the issue of ownership is not final, as it may be the subject of separate proceeding[s] specifically brought to settle the issue."[36] Hence, the fact that there is a pending case between petitioner and China Bank respecting the ownership of the property does not preclude the courts to rule on the issue of ownership in this case. | |||||