GR L 3495; (May, 1951) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-3495; May 23, 1951
ISIDORE FALEK, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NATIVIDAD GANDIONGCO DE SINGSON and JUAN SINGSON, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
On May 28, 1947, plaintiff Isidore Falek filed an action for forcible entry in the Municipal Court of Cebu against defendants Natividad Gandiongco de Singson and Juan Singson. The complaint alleged that in April 1947, the defendants entered a parcel of land (lot No. 1391-B) by force, strategy, and stealth and constructed a house of light materials thereon. The defendants, in their answer, claimed ownership of the lot and asserted that the municipal court lacked jurisdiction as the case involved a question of ownership. The municipal court absolved the defendants, focusing solely on prior material possession and finding for the defendants. Plaintiff appealed to the Court of First Instance of Cebu, which reversed the decision, declaring plaintiff entitled to possession and ordering defendants to vacate. Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeals, which certified the case to the Supreme Court, as jurisdiction was in issue.
ISSUE
Whether the Municipal Court of Cebu had original jurisdiction, and consequently the Court of First Instance appellate jurisdiction, over the action for forcible entry, considering the timing of the alleged unlawful entry and the filing of the complaint.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the Municipal Court of Cebu had no original jurisdiction, and the Court of First Instance of Cebu had no appellate jurisdiction, over the action. The complaint for forcible entry was filed more than one year after the alleged unlawful entry. Evidence indicated that if the defendants intruded, it occurred around August 1945 when they returned to Cebu City and constructed a small house after the war. The plaintiff’s evidence showed his representatives ceased to hold the property from 1944, and it was occupied by Japanese forces. The action, filed on May 28, 1947, was therefore filed beyond the one-year period prescribed for forcible entry cases. Consequently, the appealed decision was set aside, and the plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed.