Bautista vs. Gonzales
Bautista vs. Gonzales
ROLLY A. BAUTISTA,
Plaintiff, CIVIL CASE NO. 4469-23
FOR: Ejectment /
Unlawful Detainer,
Rent, and Attorney’s
Fees
-versus-
POSITION PAPER
(FOR THE DEFENDANTS)
TIMELINESS
PARTIES
STATEMENT OF FACTS
6. With the honest belief that the property was indeed owned by
her partner from his retirement benefits as police officer,
Emma constituted their family home in the subject property
and introduced improvements, repairs and maintenance;
ISSUES
I. Whether the Plaintiff has cause of action against the
Defendants.
II. Whether the Plaintiff has a valid title and right of possession
over the subject property.
ARGUMENTS
DISCUSSION.
NATURE OF AN ACTION FOR EJECTMENT
Case law poses the burden upon the Plaintiff to establish with
preponderance of evidence his case and in the present case, Rolly
has the burden of proving that he is entitled to possession and that
he was illegally deprived of said possession of the property which is
the subject of the instant case. In this regard, he has failed to
discharge the burden.
1
G.R. No. 242837, October 5, 2022.
A complaint sufficiently alleges a cause of action for unlawful
detainer 2 if it states the following:
(d) Within one year from the making of the last demand to
vacate the property on the defendant, the plaintiff instituted
the complaint for ejectment.
In the instant case, the Plaintiff basis his right of possession over
the subject property in a Deed of Sale dated 23 March 2004
allegedly executed between him and the original owners, the
Spouses Leonardo V. Cuevas and Pilar Antonio and that by mere
act of tolerance and owing to Emma’s relationship with his father,
he allowed them to reside in the subject lot.
2
De Guzman-Fuerte v. Spouses Estomo, G.R. No. 223399, April 23, 2018.
Deed of Sale. Section 51 of P. D. 1529, otherwise known as the
“Property Registration Decree” which states:
From the foregoing, acts of tolerance are those which are not merely
inaction nor silence on the part of the persons asserting them but
positive overt acts constituting permission for the acts of the
persons in possession of the property. Likewise, acts of tolerance
must be proved exhibited by the plaintiff must be alleged with
specificity and adduced with evidence.
5
G.R. No. 211539, October 17, 2016.
leave the property is the owner's right of possession asserted
and the tenant's refusal or failure to move out makes his
possession unlawful, because it is violative of the owner's
preferential right of possession.
We further elucidated the concept of possession by mere tolerance
in Calubayan, et al. v. Pascual, thus:
The Court provided that such acts of tolerance must precede the
possession of the defendant of the subject property, to wit: 9
6
Lozano v. Fernandez, G.R. No. 212979, February 18, 2019.
7
Galacgac v. Bautista, G.R. No. 221384 (Resolution), November 9, 2020.
8
Go, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142276, August 14, 2001.
9
Carbonilla v. Abiera, supra.
tolerance as alleged in the complaint. Tolerance must be
[present] right from the start of possession sought to be
recovered to be within the purview of unlawful detainer.
Mere tolerance always carries with it "permission" and not
merely silence or inaction for silence or inaction is
negligence, not tolerance.
Likewise, even assuming that Rolly has a valid title and right if
possession over the subject property, she cannot be ejected therein
without indemnity for the improvements she has introduced. This
contention finds it reliance under Article 448 of the Civil Code
which provides:
10
G.R. No. 211170, July 3, 2017.
Article 448. The owner of the land on which anything has
been built, sown or planted in good faith, shall have the
right to appropriate as his own the works, sowing or
planting, after payment of the indemnity provided for in
Articles 546 and 548, or to oblige the one who built or planted
to pay the price of the land, and the one who sowed, the proper
rent. However, the builder or planter cannot be obliged to buy
the land if its value is considerably more than that of the
building or trees. In such case, he shall pay reasonable rent, if
the owner of the land does not choose to appropriate the
building or trees after proper indemnity. The parties shall agree
upon the terms of the lease and in case of disagreement, the
court shall fix the terms thereof.
PRAYER
Other reliefs that are just and equitable under the premises
are likewise prayed for.
AILYN B. AÑANO
Law Student Practitioner
Lyceum of the Philippines University
DCA Luz-IV-2023-501
Contact Number: 0955-078-3441
Email Address: [email protected]
Copy Furnish:
ROLLY A. BAUTISTA
Block 12 Lot 10,
St. Peter I, Dasmariñas, Cavite
EMMA BAUTISTA
Affiant
NOTARY PUBLIC
Doc. No.: ____;
Page No.: ____;
Book No.: ____;
Series of 2024.