G.R. No. 161722, July 20, 2006
G.Q. GARMENTS, INC., petitioner, vs. ANGEL MIRANDA, FLORENDA MIRANDA and EXECUTIVE MACHINERIES and EQUIPMENT CORPORATION, respondents.

FACTS

Angel Miranda owned a parcel of land. In 1984, he verbally leased it to Executive Machineries and Equipment Corporation (EMECO), a company owned by his son Angelito and daughter-in-law Florenda Miranda, on a month-to-month basis. After Angelito’s death in 1988, EMECO stopped paying rent but remained in possession. The factory on the land burned down in 1989. Angel eventually terminated the lease in 1991 and demanded payment of accrued rentals. EMECO vacated but did not pay.
Subsequently, Florenda Miranda offered to sublease the property to G.Q. Garments, Inc., presenting a forged lease contract purportedly signed by Angel. G.Q. Garments’ officer, Wilson Kho, declined unless Angel signed personally. Kho then located Angel, and on December 23, 1991, G.Q. Garments and Angel executed a valid 15-year lease. The petitioner paid advance rent, secured permits, moved equipment onto the property, and began construction.
On January 27, 1992, Florenda, with armed men, forcibly evicted G.Q. Garments from the premises, seizing its equipment. Angel filed a case to declare the forged lease null and void. G.Q. Garments filed a separate action for damages and recovery of possession against Angel, EMECO, and Florenda.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner G.Q. Garments, Inc. is entitled to recover damages from respondent Angel Miranda for the latter’s alleged failure to deliver peaceful possession of the leased property.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court denied the petition, affirming the Court of Appeals. The legal logic is anchored on the obligations of a lessor under Article 1654 of the Civil Code, which includes delivering the thing leased and maintaining the lessee in its peaceful possession. The Court ruled that Angel Miranda fully complied with these duties. He had the legal right and capacity to lease the property as its registered owner. He executed a valid contract of lease with the petitioner and actually placed the petitioner in physical possession of the property, enabling it to begin construction.
The disturbance in peaceful possession was caused not by any act or defect attributable to Angel Miranda, but by the unlawful, tortious acts of a third party, Florenda Miranda, who used force and intimidation. A lessor is not an insurer of the lessee’s possession against all forms of disturbance; the warranty is only against the lessor’s own acts and those of persons claiming under a title superior to the lessor’s. Florenda claimed under a forged document, which constituted no title at all against Angel. Angel took positive steps to protect the petitioner’s possession by seeking police assistance and filing a case to nullify the forged contract. Therefore, he cannot be held liable for damages arising from the trespass committed by Florenda.