ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1916 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 10649 March 1, 1916 - BENITO AFRICA v. KURT W. GRONKE

    034 Phil 50

  • G.R. No. 10838 March 1, 1916 - ALFONSA CARLOS ET AL. v. MLA. ELECTRIC RAILROAD & LIGHT COMPANY

    034 Phil 55

  • G.R. No. 11148 March 1, 1916 - LIM BUN SU v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 62

  • G.R. No. 10563 March 2, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO BONIFACIO

    034 Phil 65

  • G.R. No. 11262 March 2, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. GREGORIO T. GIMENEZ

    034 Phil 74

  • G.R. No. 7676 March 3, 1916 - JOSE LINO LUNA v. ESTEBAN ARCENAS

    034 Phil 80

  • G.R. No. 10265 March 3, 1916 - EUTIQUIANO CUYUGAN v. ISIDORO SANTOS

    034 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. 10918 March 4, 1916 - WILLIAM FRESSEL ET AL. v. MARIANO UY CHACO SONS & COMPANY

    034 Phil 122

  • G.R. No. 10971 March 4, 1916 - BEAUMONT & TENNEY v. BERNARD HERSTEIN

    034 Phil 127

  • G.R. No. 11216 March 6, 1916 - COMPAÑIA GENERAL DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS v. BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS

    034 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. 8473 March 7, 1916 - SANTIAGO YASON v. JULIO MAGSAKAY

    034 Phil 143

  • G.R. No. 10437 March 7, 1916 - JESUSA LAUREANO v. EUGENIO KILAYCO

    034 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. 10729 March 7, 1916 - UY PO v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 153

  • G.R. No. 10793 March 17, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ILOILO

    034 Phil 157

  • G.R. No. 11196 March 8, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. EUSTAQUIO YUMUL

    034 Phil 169

  • G.R. No. 11321 March 8, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. SY BUN KUE

    034 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. 10051 March 9, 1916 - ERLANGER & GALINGER v. SWEDISH EAST ASIATIC CO.

    034 Phil 178

  • G.R. No. 11115 March 10, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. SILVESTRE YU TUICO

    034 Phil 209

  • G.R. No. 10297 March 11, 1916 - AGAPITO BONZON v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORK ET AL.

    034 Phil 211

  • G.R. No. 8135 March 13, 1916 - FRED J. LEGARE ET AL. v. ANTONIA CUERQUES

    034 Phil 221

  • G.R. No. 10449 March 13, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ACLEMANDOS BLEIBEL

    034 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. 8092 March 14, 1916 - RUFINA BONDAD ET AL. v. VENANCIO BONDAD ET AL.

    034 Phil 232

  • G.R. No. 10578 March 14, 1916 - PACIFIC COMMERCIAL COMPANY v. MAURICIA SOTTO

    034 Phil 237

  • G.R. No. 11000 March 14, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VALERIO MENDIETA

    034 Phil 242

  • G.R. No. 9497 March 15, 1916 - SIMONA GALICIA v. TEODORA NAVARRO

    034 Phil 245

  • G.R. No. 11467 March 15, 1916 - NG HIAN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 248

  • G.R. No. 10462 March 16, 1916 - ANDREA DUMASUG v. FELIX MODELO

    034 Phil 252

  • G.R. No. 9164 March 17, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VY BO TEC

    034 Phil 260

  • G.R. No. 10354 March 17, 1916 - FELIPE DORADO v. AGRIPINO VIRIÑA

    034 Phil 264

  • G.R. No. 10718 March 17, 1916 - United States v. Ramon FERRER

    034 Phil 277

  • G.R. No. 11464 March 17, 1916 - VICTOR BIUNAS v. BENITO MORA

    034 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. 8954 March 21, 1916 - DOROTEA CABANG v. MARTIN DELFINADO

    034 Phil 291

  • G.R. No. 9340 March 21, 1916 - MARGARITO PENALOSA LO INTONG v. ISIDORA JAMITO ET AL.

    034 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. 10889 March 21, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. VALERIO MARTINEZ

    034 Phil 305

  • G.R. No. 11098 March 21, 1916 - CO PAIN v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 310

  • G.R. No. 11154 March 21, 1916 - E. MERRITT v. GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS

    034 Phil 311

  • G.R. No. 8979 March 22, 1916 - ADRIANO PANLILIO v. PROVICIAL BOARD OF PAMPANGA ET AL.

    034 Phil 323

  • G.R. No. 10978 March 22, 1916 - SIXTO MANLAGNIT v. ALFONSO SANCHEZ DY PUICO

    034 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. 11315 March 22, 1916 - DIONISION CHANCO v. CARLOS IMPERIAL

    034 Phil 329

  • G.R. No. 8941 March 23, 1916 - GUILLERMO VELOSO v. LORENZO BECERRA

    034 Phil 334

  • G.R. No. 9984 March 23, 1916 - PETRONA JAVIER v. LAZARO OSMEÑA

    034 Phil 336

  • G.R. No. 10769 March 23, 1916 - RAYMUNDO MELLIZA v. F. W. TOWLE

    034 Phil 345

  • G.R. No. 11119 March 23, 1916 - JUANA RIVERA v. RICHARD CAMPBELL

    034 Phil 348

  • G.R. No. 8642 March 24, 1916 - STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORK v. ANTONIO BABASA ET AL.

    034 Phil 354

  • G.R. Nos. 8765 & 10920 March 24, 1916 - PEDRO DIMAGIBA v. ANSELMO DIMAGIBA

    034 Phil 357

  • G.R. No. 8806 March 24, 1916 - ALEJANDRO BALDEMOR v. EUSEBIA MALANGYAON

    034 Phil 367

  • G.R. No. 9919 March 24, 1916 - ELISA TORRES DE VILLANUEVA v. STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF NEW YORD ET AL.

    034 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. 9974 March 24, 1916 - CANG YUI v. HENRY GARDENER

    034 Phil 376

  • G.R. No. 10560 March 24, 1916 - IN RE: Tan Po Pic v. JUAN L. JAVIER

    034 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. 10624 March 24, 1916 - MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 385

  • G.R. No. 10663 March 24, 1916 - JOSEPH E. FOX v. MANILA ELECTRIC RAILROAD AND LIGHT COMPANY

    034 Phil 389

  • G.R. No. 11384 March 24, 1916 - ANTONIO GUEVARA v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 394

  • G.R. No. 10045 March 25, 1916 - PHIL. RAILWAY COMPANY v. WILLIAM T. NOLTING

    034 Phil 401

  • G.R. No. 10777 March 25, 1916 - ALEJANDRA v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF PANGASINAN

    034 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. 11157 March 25, 1916 - POLICARPIO RAMIREZ v. FRANCISCO DE OROZCO

    034 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 10510 March 27, 1916 - LEONCIO ZARATE v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS ET AL.

    034 Phil 416

  • G.R. No. 10580 March 27, 1916 - TEODORO DE LOS REYES v. MAXIMINO PATERNO

    034 Phil 420

  • G.R. No. 11607 March 27, 1916 - PHIL. SUGAR ESTATES DEV. CO. (LTD.) v. ARMANDO CAMPS Y CAMPS

    034 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. 9845 March 28, 1916 - J. C. RUYMANN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    034 Phil 428

  • G.R. No. 10054 March 28, 1916 - UNITED STATES v. ATANASIO CLARAVALL

    034 Phil 441

  • G.R. No. 10264 March 28, 1916 - CHOA TEK HEE v. PHIL. PUBLISHING CO.

    034 Phil 447

  • G.R. No. 10595 March 28, 1916 - TEODORO KALAMBAKAL v. VICENTE PAMATMAT ET AL.

    034 Phil 465

  • G.R. No. 10810 March 28, 1916 - MUNICIPALITY OF AGOO v. GABRIEL TAVORA

    034 Phil 475

  • G.R. No. 10902 March 28, 1916 - SERAPIA DE JESUS v. PABLO PALMA

    034 Phil 483

  • G.R. No. 11156 March 28, 1916 - IN RE: DU TEC CHUAN. M. G. VELOSO

    034 Phil 488

  • G.R. No. 11363 March 28, 1916 - BERNARDO MOLDEN v. INSULAR COLLETOR OF CUSTOMS

    034 Phil 493

  • G.R. No. 11366 March 28, 1916 - INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS v. GOERGE R. HARVEY

    034 Phil 503

  • G.R. No. 9550 March 29, 1916 - BACHRACH GARAGE v. HOTCHKISS & CO.

    034 Phil 506

  • G.R. No. 10019 March 29, 1916 - THOMAS A. WALLACE v. PUJALTE & CO.

    034 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. 10202 March 29, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS Ex Rel. MUN. OF CARDONA v. MUN. OF BINANGONAN ET AL.

    034 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. 10474 March 29, 1916 - FRANCISCO OSORIO Y GARCIA v. SOLEDAD OSORIO

    034 Phil 522

  • G.R. No. 10493 March 29, 1916 - FREDERICK L. COHEN v. BENGUET COMMERCIAL CO. (Ltd.)

    034 Phil 526

  • G.R. No. 10751 March 29, 1916 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. MARIA CABALLERO Y APARICI

    034 Phil 540

  • G.R. No. 10778 March 29, 1916 - MUNICIPALITY OF DUMANGAS v. ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF JARO

    034 Phil 541

  • G.R. No. 11008 March 29, 1916 - MARIANO REAL ET AL. v. CESAREO MALLARI

    034 Phil 547

  • G.R. No. 11068 March 29, 1916 - FERNANDEZ HERMANOS v. HAROLD M. PITT

    034 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. 11274 March 29, 1916 - RAFAELA DALMACIO v. ALBERTO BARRETTO

    034 Phil 554

  • G.R. No. 11585 March 29, 1916 - PABLO PERLAS v. PEDRO CONCEPCION

    034 Phil 559

  • G.R. No. 8697 March 30, 1916 - M. GOLDSTEIN v. ALIJANDRO ROCES ET AL.

    034 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. 8988 March 30, 1916 - HARTFORD BEAUMONT v. MAURO PRIETO, ET AL.

    041 Phil 670

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. 8473   March 7, 1916 - SANTIAGO YASON v. JULIO MAGSAKAY<br /><br />034 Phil 143

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 8473. March 7, 1916. ]

    SANTIAGO YASON and MARIA NAVARRO, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. JULIO MAGSAKAY and THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Defendants. THE DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Appellant.

    Attorney-General Villamor for Appellant.

    Gaudencio Medina for Appellees.

    SYLLABUS


    APPEAL BY PARTY WHO HAS NO REAL INTEREST IN RESULT OF THE LITIGATION. — Held: Under the facts stated in the opinion, that the appellant having no real interest in the result of the litigation, the judgment of the lower court should not be modified or reversed.


    D E C I S I O N


    JOHNSON, J. :


    This action was commenced in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Nueva Ecija, on the 25th of July, 1911. Its purpose was to recover of the defendant, Julio Magsakay, the possession of 8 hectares of land, particularly described in paragraph 5 of the complaint. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff, Maria Navarro, is the absolute owner and in the barrio of Sangitan, in the municipality of Cabanatuan, Province of Nueva Ecija; that the 8 hectares of land in question constitute a part of said mass of land. The plaintiff prayed for a judgment for the possession of the land and for damages in the sum of P500.

    On the 23rd of August, 1911, the defendant, Julio Magsakay, filed a general and special answer. In the special defense the defendant alleges that the plaintiffs had appropriated a certain parcel of land, very indefinitely described, supposedly the land in question, which belonged t him, and prayed that the court should declare that said 8 hectares belonged to him, and that a judgment for damages in the sum of P2,100 be rendered against the plaintiffs and in his favor.

    On the 24th of August, 1911, the provincial fiscal of the Provinces of Tarlac and Nueva Ecija appeared, without first having obtained permission of the court and without having been made a defendant, and presented a general and special defense. In his special defense he alleged that the land occupied by the defendant, Julio Magsakay, was involved in a petition for homestead which had theretofore been presented, and prayed that the defendant be absolved from all liability under the complaint.

    On the 30th of October, 1911, the defendant, Julio Magsakay, presented a amended answer, in which, in addition to the facts alleged in his original answer, he alleged that he had presented a petition to the Bureau of Lands, requesting that he be granted a homestead upon said lands, and prayed that he be declared to be the owner of said 8 hectares of land, and that a judgment be rendered against the plaintiffs and in his favor for the sum of P2,100.

    On the 7th of October, 1911, the plaintiffs presented an answer to the amended answer of the defendant, Julio Magsakay, in which it was again alleged that the plaintiff, Maria Navarro, was the owner of the 8 hectares of land, and that they constituted a part of the 30 hectares described in paragraph 3 of her complaint. She denied that she had appropriated the 8 hectares of land in question, and alleged that she had been in possession of the same for a period of 30 years; that the action interposed by the defendant had been prescribed.

    On the 22nd of November, 1911, the defendant presented a petition asking that the Director of Lands be made a party to the action. On the 25th of November, 1911, said petition was granted and the Director of Public Lands was made a party to the action.

    On the 25th of January, 1912, the Attorney-General, on behalf of the Director of Lands, appeared and answered. His answer was a general and special defense. In his special defense he alleged that the complaint of the plaintiffs did not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and prayed that the defendant be absolved from any liability under the complaint, with costs against the plaintiffs.

    Upon the issue thus presented the action was brought on for trial in the month of January, 1912. After hearing the evidence the court a quo reached the conclusion that the plaintiff, Maria Navarro, was entitled to the possession of the 30 hectares of land described in paragraph 3 of her complaint, including the 8 hectares in question, and rendered a judgment ordering the defendant, Julio Magsakay, to deliver the possession of said parcel of land, composed of 8 hectares, to the plaintiffs and to pay the costs.

    On the 9th of May, 1912, the fiscal of the Provinces of Tarlac and Nueva Ecija excepted to the judgment of the court and presented a motion for a new trial, which motion was denied, and he now appeals to this Court. The defendant, Julio Magsakay, did not appeal from the judgment of the lower court.

    The brief presented on behalf of the appellant is signed by the Attorney-General.

    From an examination of the record, certain facts seem to be proved by a large preponderance of the evidence:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    First. That Teodulo Navarro was the father of the plaintiff, Maria Navarro; that the plaintiff, Santiago Yason, is the husband of Maria Navarro.

    Second. That Teodulo Navarro have been in the quiet and peaceable enjoyment of the possession of said 30 hectares of land described in paragraph 3 of the complaint for a period of 25 or more years; that when he died the plaintiff Maria Navarro entered into a possession of said parcel of land and remained in the peaceable and quiet possession of the same for a period of 11 years or more.

    Third. That in the month of March, 1910, the defendant, Julio Magsakay, presented a petition to the Director of Public Lands, praying that he be granted a homestead of a piece of land measuring 800 meters in length and 200 meters wide; that the defendant took possession of the said 8 hectares of land (presumably the same land described in his petition for a homestead) in the month of May, 1910.

    Fourth. By Exhibit B (see record, p. 46) it will be seen that the defendant, Julio Magsakay, in a letter dated the 20th of March, 1911, and directed to the Director of Public Lands of the Philippine Islands, requested that the concession that had been made to him under his petition for a homestead be canceled.

    Fifth. In the month of April, 1911, the defendant, Julio Magsakay, in an affidavit (see Exhibit A) again affirmed that the 8 hectares of land, more or less, which he had solicited for a homestead, is the exclusive property of Maria Navarro, and that the latter inherited the same from her deceased father, Teodulo Navarro; that Maria Navarro had possessed the land for a long period; that the petition for homestead had been presented without his consent.

    During the trial of the cause, Julio Magsakay attempted to show, while admitting that he had signed Exhibits A and B, that he had not understood their contents nor their purpose. Some of the witnesses who signed said documents were called as witnesses and they insisted that Julio fully understood the contents and purpose of said documents. In view of his admissions and considering that declarations of the witnesses who were present and signed said documents with him, we are not inclined to believe his contention that he did not intend to have his petitions for a homestead canceled, as he expressly prayed in his letter Exhibit B directed to the Director of Lands, dated the 20th of March, 1911.

    In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, we are not inclined to change, alter, or modify the judgment of the lower court upon the appeal only of the Attorney-General. The defendant himself having renounced the right of homestead, there is no apparent reason why the Attorney-General, on behalf of the Director of Lands, should object.

    For all of the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that the judgment of the lower court should be and is hereby affirmed, with costs against the Appellant. So ordered.

    Arellano, C.J., Torres, Moreland and Trent, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. 8473   March 7, 1916 - SANTIAGO YASON v. JULIO MAGSAKAY<br /><br />034 Phil 143




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED