G.R. No. L-5891. February 26, 1954

NAZARIO LAGUMEN, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLANT, VS. SILVINO ABASOLO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLEES.

Decisions / Signed Resolutions February 26, 1954 BENGZON, J.:
Download PDF


BENGZON, J.:


The plaintiff has appealed from the decision of the court of first
instance of Albay dismissing his complaint filed in May 1949, to
recover his parcel of land, which the five defendants, having
“unlawfully entered” it in 1947, refused to vacate notwithstanding
repeated demands.

The court sustained the defendants’ motion to dismiss on the ground
of lack of jurisdiction. It held the opinion that under section 44(5)
and section 38 of the Judiciary Act of 1948 (R. A. No. 296) courts of
first instance have no longer jurisdiction to entertain unlawful
detainer cases, which by said statute were placed under the exclusive
original jurisdiction of the justice of the peace courts and municipal
courts.

Appellant claims the lower court erred in considering his action as
one for unlawful detainer, because his complaint was for recovery of
possession or accion publiciana, since it was instituted after more than one year had elapsed from the forcible seizure. And he quoted Baguioro vs. Barrios,[1] and other allied decisions in his brief filed in January 1953.

In February 1953, this court decided the identical issue in Firmeza vs. David,[2]
L-5832, holding that under the Judiciary Act of 1948 sections 44(6) and
88, when the illegal deprivation of realty has lasted more than one
year, the action is one for recovery of possession or accion publiciana, which properly falls within the jurisdiction of courts of first instance.

Aware of such decision, and expressly referring to it, the
defendants-appellees in short statement declared they “saw no further
necessity of submitting” their brief. With commendable sincerity, they
made no attempt at distinctions, impliedly admitting the untenability
of their position. If all litigants displayed the same attitude, much
of the litigation now clogging our dockets could be promptly disposed
of in the interest of speedy administration of justice.

Wherefore, the appealed order is reversed and the record will be returned for further proceedings. No costs.

Paras, C. J., Pablo, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, and Diokno, JJ., concur.


[1] 77 Phil., 120, 43 Off. Gaz., 2031.

[2] 92 Phil., 733.