GR L 90; (April, 1946) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-90; April 12, 1946
SUSANO AMOR, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ELIZABETH KRUMMER, JOSE CHE KUAK and FRANCISCO GONZALEZ, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila in an ejectment case originally filed in the municipal court. The plaintiff, Susano Amor, is the owner of the premises at No. 2050 Rizal Avenue, Manila. In or about March 1945, Amor discovered that defendants Elizabeth Krummer and Jose Che Kuak had, without his knowledge or consent, leased the premises from their co-defendant Francisco Gonzalez for a monthly rent of P900. Gonzalez had no authority from Amor to rent the premises or collect rents. Despite Amor’s notice to vacate and demand for payment of rents served on Krummer and Che Kuak on March 1, 1945, they refused to vacate or pay. When the case was appealed to the Court of First Instance, only defendant Francisco Gonzalez answered the complaint; defendants Krummer and Che Kuak were declared in default, and the court refused to lift the default. The trial court found the P900 monthly rent excessive and appraised the reasonable value for the use and occupation of the premises at P140 per month.
ISSUE
Whether the municipal court and the Court of First Instance had jurisdiction over the ejectment case, considering the appellant’s contention that the cause of action accrued more than one year prior to the suit.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance. The appellant’s contention regarding lack of jurisdiction is untenable. First, the issue of jurisdiction was not raised in the municipal court or the Court of First Instance; it was raised for the first time on appeal. Second, the evidence established that the cause of action accrued in March 1945, which was much less than one year before the suit was filed. Third, even assuming a lack of jurisdiction in the inferior court, Rule 40, Section 11 of the Rules of Court provides that if a case is tried without jurisdiction over the subject matter, the Court of First Instance may, on appeal, try the case on the merits if the parties file their pleadings and go to trial without any objection to such jurisdiction. This condition was met in this case. The judgment ordering defendants to restore possession to the plaintiff, to pay the reasonable value for use and occupation at P140 per month from March 1945 until restitution, and to pay costs, is in accordance with the facts and the law.