This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-02-10 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Likewise, in Siapno v. Manalo,[35] the Court disregarded the title/denomination of therein plaintiff Manalo's amended petition as one for Mandamus with Revocation of Title and Damages; and adjudged the same to be a real action, the filing fees for which should have been computed based on the assessed value of the subject property or, if there was none, the estimated value thereof. The Court expounded in Siapno that:In his amended petition, respondent Manalo prayed that NTA's sale of the property in dispute to Standford East Realty Corporation and the title issued to the latter on the basis thereof, be declared null and void. In a very realsense, albeit the amended petition is styled as one for "Mandamus with Revocation of Title and Damages," it is, at bottom,a suit to recover from Standford the realtyin question and to vest in respondent the ownership and possession thereof. In short, the amended petition is in reality an action in res or a real action. Our pronouncement in Fortune Motors (Phils.), Inc. vs. Court of Appeals is instructive. There, we said: | |||||