Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 146 views

    Sps Marano Vs Pryce Gases Inc Digest Property

    Uploaded by

    Florie May Calabio
    The petitioners filed a free patent application for a parcel of land which was granted. They filed an ejectment case against the respondent for illegal construction on the lot. The respondent then filed a complaint for reconveyance and later amended it to a complaint for cancellation of the petitioner's title. The court ruled that consolidation of the reivindicatory action and cancellation case was the appropriate remedy rather than dismissal, as both involved common questions of law and fact regarding ownership of the property. Consolidation allows the court to efficiently resolve interrelated issues and avoid unnecessary costs and delays.

    Copyright:

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

    Sps Marano Vs Pryce Gases Inc Digest Property

    Uploaded by

    Florie May Calabio
    146 views2 pages
    The petitioners filed a free patent application for a parcel of land which was granted. They filed an ejectment case against the respondent for illegal construction on the lot. The respondent then filed a complaint for reconveyance and later amended it to a complaint for cancellation of the petitioner's title. The court ruled that consolidation of the reivindicatory action and cancellation case was the appropriate remedy rather than dismissal, as both involved common questions of law and fact regarding ownership of the property. Consolidation allows the court to efficiently resolve interrelated issues and avoid unnecessary costs and delays.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    Sps Marano vs Pryce Gases Inc Digest Property

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The petitioners filed a free patent application for a parcel of land which was granted. They filed an ejectment case against the respondent for illegal construction on the lot. The respondent then filed a complaint for reconveyance and later amended it to a complaint for cancellation of the petitioner's title. The court ruled that consolidation of the reivindicatory action and cancellation case was the appropriate remedy rather than dismissal, as both involved common questions of law and fact regarding ownership of the property. Consolidation allows the court to efficiently resolve interrelated issues and avoid unnecessary costs and delays.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    146 views2 pages

    Sps Marano Vs Pryce Gases Inc Digest Property

    Uploaded by

    Florie May Calabio
    The petitioners filed a free patent application for a parcel of land which was granted. They filed an ejectment case against the respondent for illegal construction on the lot. The respondent then filed a complaint for reconveyance and later amended it to a complaint for cancellation of the petitioner's title. The court ruled that consolidation of the reivindicatory action and cancellation case was the appropriate remedy rather than dismissal, as both involved common questions of law and fact regarding ownership of the property. Consolidation allows the court to efficiently resolve interrelated issues and avoid unnecessary costs and delays.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    196592, April 06, 2015

    SPOUSES JUVY MARAO AND MARIA LUISA G. MARAO, Petitioners, v. PRYCE GASES,
    INCORPORATED, Respondent.

    DIGEST

    Facts:

    Spouses Juvy and Maria Luisa Marao filed a free patent application for a 9,074-
    square meter parcel of land in Damulaan, Albuera, Leyte which thereafter, the
    application was granted and they were given a OCT. An ejectment complaint was
    filed by the petitioners against Pryce Gases, Incorporated for illegal entry and
    construction of building in the lot. The MTC of Albuera, Leyte granted the
    petitioners' complaint, but the RTC reversed the MTC decision. On further appeal,
    the CA remanded the case to the MTC for trial as a reivindicatory action.

    The petitioners filed an action to quiet title against the respondent with the RTC, 8th
    Judicial Region, Branch 14, Baybay City, Leyte. A month later, the respondent filed a
    complaint for reconveyance. The petitioners moved to dismiss the respondent's
    complaint, but the RTC denied their motion. The respondent later moved to amend
    its complaint from reconveyance to the cancellation of the petitioners' certificate of
    title. The petitioners again moved to dismiss the respondent's amended complaint
    on the ground of litis pendentia in view of the then pending reivindicatory action
    with the MTC. The RTC dismissed the petitioners' motion. The petitioners moved for
    reconsideration but their motion was likewise denied by the RTC. The petitioners
    questioned the RTC's resolution in their petition for certiorari in CA

    ISSUE: WON the respondent's complaint for cancellation of title should be dismissed
    because the question of validity of the certificate of title issued in their names over
    the subject lot is already being litigated in the reivindicatory action case that is
    pending appeal before the RTC.

    RULING:

    There are three kinds of actions to recover possession of real property, namely:

    (1) actions for forcible entry or unlawful detainer, also denominated as accion
    interdictal, which are summary in nature and seek to recover only physical
    possession (possession de facto) of the property,

    (2) an accion publiciana, which is a plenary action to recover the right to possess
    the property, without claim of title, and

    (3) an accion reivindicatoria (or accion de reivindicacion) or a reivindicatory action,


    which is a plenary action to recover not only possession of, but also ownership of
    the real property
    Since a reivindicatory action includes a claim of title or ownership, the court must
    necessarily inquire into the circumstances surrounding the plaintiffs acquisition of
    his or her title to the real property sought to be recovered.

    Consolidation of the reivindicatory action and the cancellation of certificate of title


    case to be the appropriate remedy in the present situation, instead of ordering the
    dismissal of the respondent's complaint for cancellation of certificate of title,.
    Consolidation is proper when two or more actions pending, not necessarily, before
    the same court involve a common question of law or fact. In such cases, the court
    may: order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions,
    order all the actions consolidated, and make such orders concerning the
    proceedings therein for the purpose of avoiding unnecessary costs and delay.

    You might also like