Tacay V RTC Tagum, Davao Del Norte

Tacay v.
RTC of Tagum
FACTS:
In the Regional Trial Court at Tagum, Davao del Norte, three actions for
recovery of possession (acciones publicianas 2 ) were separately instituted by
Godofredo Pineda against three (3) defendants, docketed as follows:
1) vs. Antonia Noel Civil Case No. 2209
2) vs. Ponciano Panes Civil Case No. 2210
3) vs. Maximo Tacay Civil Case No. 2211.
The complaints 3 all alleged the same essential facts (1) Pineda was the
owner of a parcel of land measuring 790 square meters, his ownership being
evidenced by TCT No. T-46560; (2) the previous owner had allowed the defendants
to occupy portions of the land by mere tolerance; (3) having himself need to use the
property, Pineda had made demands on the defendants to vacate the property and
pay reasonable rentals therefor, but these demands had been refused; and (4) the
last demand had been made more than a year prior to the commencement of suit.
The complaints prayed for the same reliefs, to wit:
1) that plaintiff be declared owner of the areas occupied by the defendants;
2) that defendants and their "privies and allies" be ordered to vacate and deliver
the portions of the land usurped by them;
3) that each defendant be ordered to pay:
1) P 2,000 as monthly rents from February, 1987;
2 ) Actual damages, as proven;
3) Moral and nominal damages as the Honorable Court may fix ;
4) P30,000.00, "as attorney's fees, and representation fees of P5,000.00
per day of appearance;"
And
4) that he (Pineda) be granted such "further relief and remedies ... just and
equitable in the premises.
The prayer of each complaint contained a handwritten notation (evidently
made by plaintiff's counsel) reading, "P5,000.00 as and for," immediately above the
typewritten words, "Actual damages, as proven," the intention apparently being to
make the entire phrase read, " P5,000.00 as and for actual damages as proven.
Motions to dismiss were filed in behalf of each of the defendants by common
counsel . Every motion alleged that the Trial Court had not acquired jurisdiction of
the case —
. . . for the reason that the ... complaint violates the mandatory and clear provision
of Circular No. 7 of the ... Supreme Court dated March 24,1988, by failing to specify
all the amounts of damages which plaintiff is claiming from defendant;" and
. . . for ... failure (of the complaint) to even allege the basic requirement as to the
assessed value of the subject lot in dispute.
ISSUE:
WON the RTC has jurisdiction.
HELD:
The joint petition should be, as it is hereby, dismissed.
It should be dismissed for failure to comply with this Court's Circular No. 1-88
(effective January 1, 1989).
It is true that the complaints do not state the amounts being claimed as
actual, moral and nominal damages. It is also true, however, that the actions are not
basically for the recovery of sums of money. They are principally for recovery of
possession of real property, in the nature of an accion publiciana. Determinative of
the court's jurisdiction in this type of actions is the nature thereof, not the amount of
the damages allegedly arising from or connected with the issue of title or possession,
and regardless of the value of the property. Quite obviously, an action for recovery
of possession of real property (such as an accion plenaria de possesion) or the title
thereof, or for partition or condemnation of, or the foreclosure of a mortgage on,
said real property - in other words, a real action-may be commenced and
prosecuted without an accompanying claim for actual, moral, nominal or exemplary
damages; and such an action would fall within the exclusive, original jurisdiction of
the Regional Trial Court.
Batas Pambansa Bilang 129 provides that Regional Trial Courts shall exercise
exclusive original jurisdiction inter alia over "all civil actions which involve the title to,
or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, except actions for forcible
entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction over which
is conferred upon Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts." The rule applies regardless of the value of the real property
involved, whether it be worth more than P20,000.00 or not, infra. The rule also
applies even where the complaint involving realty also prays for an award of
damages; the amount of those damages would be immaterial to the question of the
Court's jurisdiction. The rule is unlike that in other cases e.g., actions simply for
recovery of money or of personal property, or actions in admiralty and maritime
jurisdiction 16 in which the amount claimed, or the value of the personal property, is
determinative of jurisdiction; i.e., the value of the personal property or the amount
claimed should exceed twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) in order to be
cognizable by the Regional Trial Court.
Circular No. 7 of this Court, dated March 24, 1988, cannot thus be invoked, as
the petitioner does, as authority for the dismissal of the actions at bar. That circular,
avowedly inspired by the doctrine laid down in Manchester Development
Corporation v. Court of appeals, 149 SCRA 562 (May 7, 1987), has but limited
application to said actions, as shall presently be discussed. Moreover, the rules
therein laid down have since been clarified and amplified by the Court's subsequent
decision in Sun Insurance Office, Ltd. (SIOL) v. Asuncion, et al., G.R. Nos. 79937-38,
February 13, 1989.
Circular No. 7 was aimed at the practice of certain parties who omit from the
prayer of their complaints "any specification of the amount of damages," the
omission being "clearly intended for no other purposes than to evade the payment
of the correct filing fees if not to mislead the docket clerk, in the assessment of the
filing fee.

Tacay V RTC Tagum, Davao Del Norte

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tacay V RTC Tagum, Davao Del Norte

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tacay v.

You might also like