GR L 22984; (March, 1968) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-22984; March 27, 1968
MARGARITO SARONA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. FELIPE VILLEGAS and RAMONA CARILLO, defendants-appellees.
FACTS
On January 28, 1963, plaintiffs-appellants filed a complaint styled as “Unlawful Detainer” in the Municipal Court of Padada, Davao. They alleged they were the absolute owners and in possession of a parcel of land. The complaint stated that on April 1, 1958, defendants-appellees entered the land, constructed a residential house, and remained in possession. It further alleged that on December 28, 1962, plaintiffs demanded that defendants vacate and pay rental arrears, but defendants refused. Defendants moved to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction, contending the action was actually for forcible entry and was filed beyond the one-year reglementary period. The municipal court denied the motion, proceeded to trial, and rendered judgment in favor of plaintiffs. On appeal, the Court of First Instance of Davao dismissed the case, ruling it was one of forcible entry filed out of time. Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
Whether the action filed by plaintiffs is one for forcible entry or unlawful detainer, which determines the jurisdiction of the municipal court and the timeliness of the filing.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Court of First Instance dismissing the case. The action is one for forcible entry, not unlawful detainer. The complaint’s factual averments and the evidence presented during trial in the municipal court revealed that defendants entered the land on April 1, 1958, without the consent and permission of the plaintiffs, and refused a request to remove their house. This constitutes illegal occupation from the beginning. The foundation of a forcible entry action is the forcible exclusion of the original possessor by one who entered without right, which can occur even without physical violence, simply by entering without consent and excluding the prior possessor. Since the entry was illegal at its inception, the one-year period to file the forcible entry action commenced on April 1, 1958. The complaint filed on January 28, 1963, was therefore filed beyond the one-year period, depriving the municipal court of jurisdiction. The subsequent demand to vacate in 1962 did not convert the illegal entry into a lawful detainer. The proper remedy after the lapse of one year is an accion publiciana in the Court of First Instance.