Geminiano v. Court of Appeals
Geminiano v. Court of Appeals
Geminiano v. Court of Appeals
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 2 of 11
asserted not only by the original lessor, but also by those who
succeed to his title.
________________
* THIRD DIVISION.
345
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 3 of 11
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 4 of 11
1972. In 1982, Lee sold the lot to Lily Salcedo, who in turn
sold it in 1984 to the spouses Agustin and Ester Dionisio.
On 14 February 1992, the Dionisio spouses executed a
Deed of Quitclaim
2
over the said property in favor of the
petitioners.
3
As such, the lot was registered in the latter’s
names.
________________
347
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 5 of 11
_________________
4 Id., 28.
348
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 6 of 11
________________
349
Art. 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
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 7 of 11
parties shall agree upon the terms of the lease and in case of
disagreement, the court shall fix the terms thereof.
xxx
Art. 1678. If the lessee makes, in good faith, useful
improvements which are suitable to the use for which the lease is
intended, without altering the form or substance of the property
leased, the lessor upon the termination of the lease shall pay the
lessee one-half of the value of the improvements at that time.
Should the lessor refuse to reimburse said amount, the lessee may
remove the improvements, even though the principal thing may
suffer damage thereby. He shall not, however, cause any more
impairment upon the property leased than is necessary.
With regard to ornamental expenses, the lessee shall not be
entitled to any reimbursement, but he may remove the
ornamental objects, provided no damage is caused to the principal
thing, and the lessor does not choose to retain them by paying
their value at the time the lease is extinguished.
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 8 of 11
12
_______________
351
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 9 of 11
_________________
14 §2(b), Rule 131, Rules of Court; Borre vs. Court of Appeals, 158 SCRA
560, 566 [1988]; Manuel vs. Court of Appeals, 199 SCRA 603, 607 [1991];
Munar vs. Court of Appeals, 238 SCRA 372, 380 [1994]; 49 Am Jur, op.
cit., § 129, 158.
15 Manuel vs. Court of Appeals, supra note 14, at 607-608; 49 Am Jur,
op. cit., § 110, 144; § 129, 158.
16 49 Am Jur, op. cit., § 122, 152.
17 Racaza vs. Susana Realty, Inc., 18 SCRA 1172, 1178 [1966]; Vda. de
Bacaling vs. Laguna, 54 SCRA 243, 250 [1973]; Santos vs. Court of
Appeals, 221 SCRA 42, 46 [1993].
18 Alburo vs. Villanueva, 7 Phil. 277, 280 [1907] (referring to the
provisions of the Old Civil Code); Racaza vs. Susana Realty, Inc., supra
note 17, at 1177-1178; Bulacanag vs. Francisco, 122 SCRA 498, 502
[1983]; Gabrito vs. Court of Appeals, 167 SCRA 771, 778-779 [1988];
Cabangis vs. Court of Appeals, 200 SCRA 414, 419-421 [1991]; Heirs of
the late Jaime Binuya vs. Court of Appeals, 211 SCRA 761, 766 [1992].
352
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 10 of 11
_________________
353
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 259 Page 11 of 11
——o0o——
_________________
21 Heirs of the late Jaime Binuya vs. Court of Appeals, supra note 18, at
768.
354
file:///G:/Study/Property/Cases/mht/Geminiano%20v.%20Court%20of%20Appeals_file... Apr/22/2021