GR 34004; (September, 1931) (Digest)
G.R. No. 34004; September 12, 1931
Apolonia Calma, et al. vs. Eulalio Calma
FACTS
The plaintiffs, Apolonia Calma et al., filed an action against the defendant, Eulalio Calma, seeking: (1) liquidation and delivery of their share of the yearly crops from a plantation (lot No. 283) from 1903; (2) partition of the property into two equal halves; (3) restoration of certain property or its value; and (4) damages. The defendant denied the claims and filed a counterclaim for various sums. The Court of First Instance of Tarlac dismissed both the complaint and the counterclaim on the ground of prescription. Both parties appealed.
ISSUE
1. Whether the plaintiffs’ action for their share of the crops from lot No. 283 has prescribed.
2. Whether the trial court erred in applying the statute of limitations to the defendant’s counterclaim.
RULING
1. On the plaintiffs’ appeal: The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ action. The defendant had been in possession of the entire lot from 1903 to 1927 not as a mere co-owner or administrator, but as the sole and absolute owner in good faith and adversely to the plaintiffs. His possession was protected by the statute of limitations (subsection 3, section 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure). The interruption of his possession in 1927 did not deprive him of the right, as a possessor in good faith under Article 451 of the Civil Code, to retain the products of the land up to that year.
2. On the defendant’s appeal: The Supreme Court also affirmed the dismissal of the counterclaim, but on different grounds. While the trial court erred in applying prescription sua sponte (as the plaintiffs did not plead it as a defense), the counterclaim failed on the merits. The claimed disbursements were debts of the plaintiffs’ predecessor, Gabino Calma. The plaintiffs, as heirs, are not personally liable for such debts under the applicable law, as Article 1003 of the Civil Code had been abrogated by the Code of Civil Procedure.
The judgment of the lower court was affirmed, without costs.
AI Generated by Armztrong.