G.R. No. L-14515; May 25, 1960
ENRIQUE ZOBEL, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GUILLERMO MERCADO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

This is an ejectment case originally filed in the Justice of the Peace Court of Calatagan, Batangas, on February 5, 1954. Plaintiff-appellee Enrique Zobel sought to eject defendant-appellant Guillermo Mercado from a fishpond that Mercado had leased from Zobel. The action was based on Mercado’s refusal to pay the agreed yearly rental of P239.03 despite demands. The inferior court initially dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, but the Supreme Court, via mandamus, set aside the dismissal and remanded the case for trial. After trial, the justice of the peace court ruled in favor of Zobel, ordering Mercado to vacate the fishpond, pay back rentals, and continue paying the yearly rental until vacating. Mercado appealed to the Court of First Instance, which, after a trial de novo, affirmed the decision in full. The appeal was certified to the Supreme Court as it involved only questions of law. The established facts are: the land is part of “Hacienda Bigaa” in Calatagan, Batangas, owned by Zobel and evidenced by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-8262. The land was originally owned by Jacobo Zobel and sold to Enrique Zobel on June 29, 1951. On April 15, 1950, the parties entered into a written contract of lease for a portion of the land (47,806 square meters) for fishing purposes, with a yearly rental of P50.00 per hectare. On the same date, Mercado executed a promissory note promising to pay P239.03 on May 20, 1950, representing rentals from April 1, 1949, to March 31, 1950. Mercado failed to pay this amount and subsequent rentals despite demands.

ISSUE

Whether the contract of lease is null and void on the ground that the leased fishpond is part of the public domain.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, ruling that the contract of lease is valid and binding. The contention that the fishpond is part of the public domain is untenable. The evidence is undisputed that the land is covered by a Torrens title (Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-8262) issued in favor of Zobel. The Court held that if the title erroneously included government land, only the government could properly question that fact, and the government was not a party to the action. The fact that the Bureau of Fisheries granted Mercado an ordinary fishpond permit for the area six years after the lease contract was executed does not prove government ownership; a judicial pronouncement would be necessary to exclude the land from Zobel’s title. Furthermore, by entering into the lease contract with Zobel, Mercado is estopped from denying Zobel’s title pursuant to Section 68(b), Rule 123 of the Rules of Court. Citing Alderete vs. Amandoron, the Court stated that a tenant who attorns to a landlord is estopped from disputing the landlord’s title and right to possession upon the lease’s termination. Mercado’s failure to pay rent gave Zobel the right to terminate the lease and recover possession. The decision appealed from was affirmed, with costs against appellant Mercado.