Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Rule 70 Sunflower Neighborhood Association Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Erwin Bernardino
    153 views1 page
    The Sunflower Neighborhood Association filed for an injunction claiming their houses should not be demolished since they were not parties in the unlawful detainer case regarding the land. The Court of Appeals ruled that even though the SNA members were not parties to the original case, they are considered squatters occupying the land without right and are therefore bound by the judgment in the case. As squatters, the SNA members can be ejected from the land owned by Maglaqui-Caparas, regardless of whether their houses were specifically included in the demolition order. The petition for injunction was denied and the Court of Appeals decision was affirmed.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    rule 70 sunflower neighborhood association vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The Sunflower Neighborhood Association filed for an injunction claiming their houses should not be demolished since they were not parties in the unlawful detainer case regarding the land. The Court of Appeals ruled that even though the SNA members were not parties to the original case, they are considered squatters occupying the land without right and are therefore bound by the judgment in the case. As squatters, the SNA members can be ejected from the land owned by Maglaqui-Caparas, regardless of whether their houses were specifically included in the demolition order. The petition for injunction was denied and the Court of Appeals decision was affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    153 views1 page

    Rule 70 Sunflower Neighborhood Association Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Erwin Bernardino
    The Sunflower Neighborhood Association filed for an injunction claiming their houses should not be demolished since they were not parties in the unlawful detainer case regarding the land. The Court of Appeals ruled that even though the SNA members were not parties to the original case, they are considered squatters occupying the land without right and are therefore bound by the judgment in the case. As squatters, the SNA members can be ejected from the land owned by Maglaqui-Caparas, regardless of whether their houses were specifically included in the demolition order. The petition for injunction was denied and the Court of Appeals decision was affirmed.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Sunflower Neighborhood Association vs Court of Appeals

    GR 136274 Sept 3, 2003

    Rule 70

    Facts:

    Elisa Maglaqui-Caparas filed a case for unlawful detainer against people occupying parcels of land in
    Yellowville Subd in Paranaque which belong to her mother’s estate. The MeTC of Paranaque favored
    Maglaqui and order demolition. Then another group of occupants which are members of the Sunflower
    Neighborhood Association filed for injunction and claimed that their houses should not be included in
    the demolition since they were not included as parties in the suit filed for unlawful detainer case.

    Issue:

    Whether the Sunflower Neighborhood Association members ,who were not parties to the unlawful
    detainer case may be ejected in the disputed land.

    Ruling:

    Yes, the members of the Sunflower even if not parties to the unlawful detainer case may be ejected to
    the disputed land.

    Even if an ejectment suit is an action in personam where the judgment is binding only upon the
    parties properly impleaded and given an opportunity to be heard. The judgment is binding to anyone
    who has not been impleaded if he or she is a.) trespasser, squatter or agent of the defendant
    fraudulently occpupying the property to frustrate the judgment b. )a guest or occupant of the
    premises with the permission of the defendant c.) a transferee pendente lite d.) sublesse e. co-lessee of
    f.) member or family of the attendant.

    The members of the SNA are trespassers or squatters who do not have any right to occupy the land.
    Even if they were not parties to the case, even if their houses were not included in the eviction and
    demolition orders they are also considered squatters who are bound by the judgment rendered. They
    too should vacate the land owned by Malagqui.

    Petition denied.CA decision affirmed.

    You might also like