GR 147695; (September 2007) (Digest)
G.R. No. 147695 . September 13, 2007.
Manuel C. Pagtalunan, petitioner, vs. Rufina Dela Cruz Vda. de Manzano, respondent.
FACTS
Patricio Pagtalunan, petitioner’s stepfather, entered into a Contract to Sell with respondent over a house and lot in 1974. The contract stipulated automatic rescission upon default in installment payments for 90 days, with all payments to be considered as rentals, obliging respondent to vacate. Petitioner alleged respondent defaulted after December 1979, transforming her status from buyer to lessee by mere tolerance. Respondent countered that she paid religiously until Patricio harassed her and partially demolished the house, leading to a suspension agreement in 1981. She admitted an outstanding balance but claimed payment was withheld due to Patricio’s actions. Upon Patricio’s death, petitioner, as successor-in-interest, demanded respondent vacate in 1997. After barangay conciliation failed, petitioner filed an unlawful detainer case.
ISSUE
Whether an action for unlawful detainer is the proper remedy to eject respondent, whose possession originated from a Contract to Sell, given her alleged default in payments.
RULING
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the unlawful detainer case. The Court held that respondent’s possession was based on the Contract to Sell, constituting a buyer in possession, not a lessee by tolerance. Unlawful detainer requires possession by mere tolerance of the owner, which ends upon demand to vacate. Here, respondent’s right to possess was anchored on a contractual buyer’s right, which could not be unilaterally terminated via a simple demand letter. The contract’s automatic rescission clause is ineffective without judicial or notarial demand for rescission as required by law. The proper remedy for petitioner was an action for rescission under the Civil Code or for specific performance, not summary ejectment. The Court modified the ruling, ordering respondent to pay the remaining balance of the purchase price with interest. Upon full payment, petitioner must execute a deed of sale. Failure to pay within 60 days from finality would oblige respondent to vacate, with prior payments considered as rentals.