G.R. No. L-9000; November 25, 1914
BALTAZAR PAMINSAN, plaintiff-appellee, vs. HERMENEGILDO COSTALES, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS:
On July 27, 1908, plaintiff Baltazar Paminsan filed an action in the Court of First Instance of Cagayan to recover possession of a parcel of land containing about 15 hectares. He alleged that he had been the owner and in peaceful possession of the land from 1897 until 1901, when the defendants illegally dispossessed him. He sought recovery of the land, damages of P2,000 for its use and occupation, and costs. The defendants demurred, arguing that the complaint failed to state a cause of action, but the demurrer was overruled. They then filed a general denial. During the pendency of the case, defendant Dionisio Costales died, and no answer was filed on behalf of his heirs or estate. Another defendant, Francisco Torres, sold his interest in the land, but the vendee was not made a party to the action. The trial court ruled in favor of Paminsan, declaring him the owner and ordering the sheriff to restore possession. It also awarded him P500 as damages for the defendants’ use and occupation of the land, with interest from September 1, 1908. The defendants appealed.

ISSUE:
1. Whether the trial court erred in overruling the demurrer (i.e., whether the complaint stated a sufficient cause of action).

3. Whether the award of damages for the defendants’ use and occupation was proper.

RULING:
1. On the demurrer: The Supreme Court held that the trial court did not err in overruling the demurrer. The test for sufficiency of a complaint is whether, admitting the alleged facts as true, the court can render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer. The complaint alleged ownership and illegal dispossession by the defendants, which, if proven, would entitle the plaintiff to recovery of possession and damages. Thus, the complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action.

3. On the award of damages: The Supreme Court reversed the award of P500 as damages for use and occupation. The evidence showed that the defendants occupied the land in good faith, believing they had a right to possess it at the time they entered. Therefore, they were not liable for damages.

DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The judgment of the trial court was affirmed insofar as it declared plaintiff Baltazar Paminsan the owner and entitled to possession of the land. The portion ordering the defendants to pay P500 as damages, with interest, was reversed. No costs were awarded.