G.R. No. 4701

Parties: THE ROMAN CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. ISABEL FAMILIAR, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
Date: September 22, 1908

FACTS:
For a period beyond living memory, a Roman Catholic chapel stood and was used for religious purposes on a parcel of land in Uacas, Cavite Viejo. In September 1905, a typhoon destroyed the chapel. Thereafter, the defendants, who owned the adjoining land, took possession of the chapel’s former site and incorporated it into their own property. In May 1906, The Roman Catholic Apostolic Church (plaintiff) filed an action in the Court of First Instance to recover possession of the land. The defendants claimed that the land originally belonged to their ancestor and that this ownership was acknowledged by an alleged regular annual payment of 50 centavos made to them by an “hermano mayor.” The Court of First Instance of Cavite ruled in favor of the defendants.

ISSUE:
Is The Roman Catholic Apostolic Church entitled to recover possession of the land where its chapel previously stood, or do the defendants’ claims of ancestral ownership and alleged annual payments justify their taking possession?

RULING:
The Supreme Court REVERSED the judgment of the Court of First Instance, awarding possession of the property to The Roman Catholic Apostolic Church.

The Court held that the defendants’ defense could not prevail for several reasons:
1. Lack of Connection to Alleged Payment: There was no evidence to connect the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church with the alleged annual payment of 50 centavos. The mere existence of an “hermano mayor” did not prove a cofradia (confraternity) or establish a landlord-tenant relationship with the Church. Furthermore, the payment itself was disputed by witnesses and its insignificance was inconsistent with an annual rental.
2. Improper Termination of Possession: Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that a landlord-tenant relationship existed between the defendants (as landlords) and the Church (as tenant), the defendants could not arbitrarily terminate the lease or summarily dispossess the Church. A tenant has the right to retain possession until the lease is legally terminated through proper process of law, not by the landlord’s unilateral act.
3. Proper Venue for Possessory Action: The action was correctly filed as a possessory action in the Court of First Instance, as it was not based on “force, intimidation, strategy, or stealth” within the meaning of Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which would require it to be filed in a justice of the peace court within one year.

Based on the evidence presented in this possessory action, the plaintiff, The Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, was entitled to the possession of the property.