G.R. No. 2086
Date: September 29, 1905
Parties:
– Plaintiff-Appellee: P. Eladio Alonso
– Defendant-Appellant: The Municipality of Placer
FACTS:
The plaintiff, P. Eladio Alonso, initially filed an action for recovery of possession of land in the court of a justice of the peace. On December 5, 1903, the justice of the peace rendered judgment in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of First Instance. Upon appeal, the plaintiff obtained leave to file an amended complaint, which set forth a cause of action falling outside the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace. Specifically, the amended complaint did not allege a case under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure (forcible entry and detainer), and even if it did, the action was not brought within the one-year prescriptive period from dispossession. The defendant demurred to the amended complaint, but the demurrer was overruled by the Court of First Instance. After trial on the merits, judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appealed, assigning as error the overruling of its demurrer.
ISSUE:
Whether the Court of First Instance, exercising its appellate jurisdiction over an appeal from a judgment of a justice of the peace, may permit an amendment to the complaint that changes the nature of the action to one over which the justice of the peace had no jurisdiction.
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of First Instance and sustained the demurrer to the amended complaint.
The Court held that while the Court of First Instance may allow amendments to pleadings on appeal from a justice of the peace, such amendments cannot alter the nature of the cause of action to one beyond the jurisdiction of the justice of the peace. The appellate jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance is derived solely from the appeal, and it can only adjudicate the same action that was tried below. Section 75 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which provides for a trial de novo on appeal, does not authorize a change in the nature of the action.
The Court clarified that justices of the peace have exclusive jurisdiction over forcible entry and detainer cases under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but only if brought within one year from dispossession. If the action is not filed within that period, the proper remedy is an original action for recovery of possession in the Court of First Instance, which has a ten-year prescriptive period under Section 40 of the same code. In this case, the plaintiff should have filed a separate original action in the Court of First Instance instead of amending the complaint on appeal.
The demurrer was sufficient to raise the jurisdictional issue, as lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter is not waived by failure to demur. The case was remanded to the Court of First Instance for further proceedings consistent with the ruling. No costs were awarded.