SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 241728. April 10, 2019.]
SPS. MANUEL SERRANO, JR. AND RAQUEL SERRANO, petitioners, vs.SPS. AURORA BELO REYES1AND ROGELIO V. REYES, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated10 April 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 241728 — Sps. Manuel Serrano, Jr. and Raquel Serrano versus Sps. Aurora Belo Reyes and Rogelio V. Reyes
After reviewing the Petition and its annexes, inclusive of the Court of Appeals (CA) Decision 2 dated February 19, 2018 and Resolution 3 dated August 6, 2018 in CA-G.R. SP No. 147174, the Court resolves to DENY the Petition and AFFIRM the Decision of the CA.
Spouses Manuel Serrano, Jr. (Manuel) and Raquel Serrano (petitioners) claim that the loan in dispute had a payment term of one year, and argue that the assertion of Spouses Aurora Belo Reyes (Aurora) and Rogelio V. Reyes (respondents) that Manuel and his brother Carlos Serrano (Carlos) defaulted merely a month after the grant of said loan is completely baseless. Thus, petitioners insist that the 1st and 2nd Deeds of Absolute Sale (DAS) assailed herein were falsified. In addition, petitioners aver that they have filed a separate action for cancellation of title against respondents, which is now pending before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Petitioners argue that all these, taken together, belie respondents' claim of ownership and merit the reversal of the CA's Decision.
Petitioners' assertions lack merit. While the foregoing allegations tend to cast doubt on respondents' ownership and their consequent right to possess Lot 4, the Court notes that petitioners failed to present any evidence herein to substantiate the same.
For an action for unlawful detainer to prosper, the plaintiff must establish the following jurisdictional facts: (i) initially, possession of property by the defendant was by contract with or by tolerance of the plaintiff; (ii) eventually, such possession became illegal upon notice by plaintiff to defendant of the termination of the latter's right of possession; (iii) thereafter, the defendant remained in possession of the property and deprived the plaintiff of the enjoyment thereof; and (iv) within one year from the last demand on defendant to vacate the property, the plaintiff instituted the complaint for ejectment. 4
The CA correctly observed that the transfer of ownership of Lot 4 from Carlos and Manuel to Aurora converted the nature of petitioners' possession from one based on ownership to one based on Aurora's tolerance, the latter being the new registered owner. In the present case, the Court is constrained to rule that respondents have a better right to possession as registered owners who are entitled to exercise all attributes of ownership over Lot 4, including possession thereof. 5
Nevertheless, it bears stressing that the only issue for resolution in an unlawful detainer case is physical or material possession of the premises, independent of any claim of ownership by any of the party-litigants. 6 Hence, this ruling is subject to the final resolution of issues concerning the validity of respondents' claim of ownership, particularly, the veracity of the 1st and 2nd DAS, and the integrity of Aurora's transfer certificate of title in the separate action for cancellation of title now pending before the RTC.
SO ORDERED. (PERLAS-BERNABE, J., on leave)"
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Also appears as "Aurora Belo-Reyes" and "Aurora B. Reyes" in some parts of the rollo.
2.Rollo, pp. 27-38. Penned by Associate Justice Pedro B. Corales, with Associate Justices Rosmari D. Carandang (now a Member of this Court) and Elihu A. Ybañez concurring.
3.Id. at 40-41.
4.Javelosa v. Tapus, G.R. No. 204361, July 4, 2018, p. 9.
5. Sec Baring v. Elena Loan and Credit Company, Inc., G.R. No. 224225, August 14, 2017, 837 SCRA 133, 141, citing CIVIL CODE, ART. 428. See also Go v. Looyuko, 713 Phil. 125, 131-132 (2013).
6. See Santiago v. Northbay Knitting, Inc., G.R. No. 217296, October 11, 2017, 842 SCRA 502, 510.