Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 134 views

    Rule 70 - Tirona Vs Alejo

    Uploaded by

    Erwin Bernardino
    Spouses Tirona alleged that Alejo deprived them of possession of their fishpond by building a house on the property. However, the court found an ongoing land adjudication case regarding possession of the lot. The court ruled that Tirona could not file a forcible entry case against Alejo until proving prior physical possession, as legal possession differs from actual possession. Ownership alone is insufficient for a forcible entry claim when possession is disputed in another case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Rule 70 - Tirona Vs Alejo

    Uploaded by

    Erwin Bernardino
    134 views1 page
    Spouses Tirona alleged that Alejo deprived them of possession of their fishpond by building a house on the property. However, the court found an ongoing land adjudication case regarding possession of the lot. The court ruled that Tirona could not file a forcible entry case against Alejo until proving prior physical possession, as legal possession differs from actual possession. Ownership alone is insufficient for a forcible entry claim when possession is disputed in another case.

    Original Title

    Rule 70_Tirona vs Alejo

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Spouses Tirona alleged that Alejo deprived them of possession of their fishpond by building a house on the property. However, the court found an ongoing land adjudication case regarding possession of the lot. The court ruled that Tirona could not file a forcible entry case against Alejo until proving prior physical possession, as legal possession differs from actual possession. Ownership alone is insufficient for a forcible entry claim when possession is disputed in another case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    134 views1 page

    Rule 70 - Tirona Vs Alejo

    Uploaded by

    Erwin Bernardino
    Spouses Tirona alleged that Alejo deprived them of possession of their fishpond by building a house on the property. However, the court found an ongoing land adjudication case regarding possession of the lot. The court ruled that Tirona could not file a forcible entry case against Alejo until proving prior physical possession, as legal possession differs from actual possession. Ownership alone is insufficient for a forcible entry claim when possession is disputed in another case.

    Copyright:

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

    TIRONA VS ALEJO

    GR NO. 129313, OCTOBER 10, 2001


    FACTS: Spouses Tirona alleged in their complaint that Alejo deprived them the
    possession of their fishpond by building a house thereon. However, the court found out
    that the subject lot has an undergoing adjudication case, hence, the possession of the
    lot is in question and is prejudicial to the decision of the court.
    ISSUE: Whether spouses Tirona can still file a case of forcible entry against Alego
    pending their proof of possession.
    RULING: NO. The court held that in actions for forcible entry, two allegations are
    mandatory for the municipal trial court to acquire jurisdiction: 1. The plaintiff must allege
    his prior physical possession of the property and; 2. He must also allege that he was
    deprived of his possession by any of the means provided for in Sec. 1, Rule 70, namely,
    force, intimidation, threats, strategy and stealth.
    Tirona’s allegation that they are the registered owners of the lot miserably falls
    short in satisfying the required allegations. Legal possession is not the same as actual
    prior physical possession.

    You might also like