ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 143012.March 4, 2002]
ASIA NATIVE PRODUCTS & REALTY CORP. vs. CA, et al.
THIRD DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated MAR 4 2002 .
G.R. No. 143012(Asia Native Products and Realty Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, Hon. Emmanuel Laurea, Presiding Judge, Branch 74, Malabon Regional Trial Court, et al.)
Petitioner assails the resolution of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the regional trial court which reversed that of the metropolitan trial court, thus declaring that petitioner failed to prove ownership of the subject property occupied by private respondent.Consequently, the ejectment suit filed by petitioner against private respondents was dismissed.
The subject of the instant controversy is a portion of a building, 2 warehouses and an office space which utilized by private respondents as their residence and place of business.Said premises are located within a compound consisting of several parcels of land with a total area of 13,545 square meters and covered by several transfer certificates of title either in the name of petitioner or of a certain Chua Luan.
Petitioner corporation was founded by Chua Luan who is also its controlling owner and president and private respondent Leticia Chua, his daughter, worked as his secretary.Since 1977 private respondents have been occupying the subject premises for their personal use for free.
On September 5, 1996, Chua Luan died intestate.Thereafter, private respondent, together with her sisters Pacita, Mary, Chading, and Bebe, filed a petition for administration of their father's estate.Apparently, the filing of said petition polarized the descendants into two groups, to the first group belongs Jose Chua, the new president of petitioner corporation.The rivalry resulted in the filing of the ejectment case subject matter in the case at bar.
In the complaint for ejectment, petitioner, represented by its new president, Jose T. Chua, sought to recover the subject premises from private respondents as well as rentals from March 1994.
Private respondents on the other hand claim that the subject premises is part of the estate of Chua Luan and respondent Leticia Chua being an heir of the latter, she is a co-owner of the disputed premises.
The municipal trial court decided in favor of petitioner.However, upon appeal, the regional trial court reversed on the ground that petitioner failed to prove that the subject premises was within the 358 square meter portion of the compound which it owned.
Displeased, petitioner elevated the matter to the Court of Appeals which in turn affirmed the regional trial court.
Thus, the instant petition which is initially denied by the First Division on September 11, 2000.It was, however, reinstated upon reconsideration on November 13, 2000, thence transferred to this Division.
We vote to deny due course to the petition.
As correctly ratiocinated, in the case bar both parties assert ownership of the subject premises.Thus it is indispensable to first settle the issue on ownership to determine physical possession of the subject property.
Both the regional trial court and Court of Appeals found that petitioner failed to sufficiently prove ownership of the subject premises.Corollarily, the Court has ruled that a person who claims the ownership of property is in duty bound to clearly identify the land claimed, in accordance with the titles on which he founds his right of ownership, and he shall not be permitted to rely upon defects in the defendant's title.Failure to prove his right of ownership will bar an action to recover the property.His right to recover must be founded on positive title or right, and not merely on negative ones, such as the lack or insufficiency of title on the part of the defendant.The possessor has a presumption of title, and unless the petitioner proves he has a better right, he cannot recover the property from the defendant (Marcelo vs. Maniquis, 35 Phils, 134).
WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.
SO ORDERED. (Gutierrez, J., no part.)
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
