GR L 20617; (May, 1965) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-20617 May 31, 1965.
Bruno Garcia, petitioner, vs. Dalmacio Anas, et al., respondents.
FACTS
Dalmacio Anas filed a complaint for forcible entry against Bruno Garcia before the Justice of the Peace Court of Zablan, Mt. Province, praying that Garcia be ordered to deliver possession of the land in litigation. Garcia, in his answer, claimed the property was within the parcel of land he inherited from his father and that he had been in possession without molestation. The justice of the peace dismissed the case, holding Garcia entitled to possession. On appeal, the Court of First Instance of Baguio also dismissed the complaint, finding that Anas failed to identify the land from which he claimed to have been dispossessed. The Court of Appeals reversed, ordering Garcia to restore possession to Anas and pay attorney’s fees. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court via a petition for review.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of First Instance erred in dismissing the forcible entry complaint based on the plaintiff’s failure to establish ownership or title to the land, instead of resolving the issue of prior physical possession.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. It held that in an action for ejectment (forcible entry), the only issue is possession de facto (physical possession). The purpose is to protect a possessor from physical encroachment. Title or ownership is not involved; a person in actual possession is entitled to be maintained in it even against the owner. The court must determine prior possession and, if lost through force, stealth, or violence, restore it regardless of title. The Court of First Instance incorrectly based its dismissal on Anas’s failure to prove ownership. The Court of Appeals correctly focused on determining the actual possessor and whether that possession was disturbed, finding that Anas was in prior possession and was dispossessed by Garcia’s acts of surveying, fencing, and turning carabaos loose on the land. The Supreme Court declined to re-examine these factual findings.