ELAND PHILIPPINES v AZUCENA GARCIA

Respondents filed for quieting a title against eland saying they are owners of
the land.under sec 48 of CA 141 as amended. They were in continuous public
and adverse possession for 30 years and they were not aware someone has
legal interest of the land until they filed for tax purposes. They found out the
lot was registered to the petitioner. They aver that they were not notified of
the registration case.
When respondent filed a motion for summary judgement the trial court
granted the land to respondent as rightful owner. Petitioner appealed CA
dismissed the appeal.
Issue: The propriety of summary proceeding judgement for quieting of title.
Held: GRANTED THE PETITION
According to petitioner that the 10 day notice was violated in pursuant to
rule 35 Rules of Civil procedure.
The SC ruled that such was properly observed by the CA, due process is
found in reasonable opportunity to be heard and submit ones evidence.
Summary judgement was not proper as it is only permitted when there is no
genuine issue and a moving party is entitled to a judgement as a matter of
law. In their motion for summary judgment respondent merely reiterated
their averments in the complaint and some issued opposed by the petitioner
and failed to clearly demonstrate the absence of any genuine issue of fact.
On the contrary petitioners Ad cautelam raises genuine factual and triable
issues by specifically denying all allegations.
Clearly the facts pleaded by the respondents in their motion for summary
judgemnt have been duly disputed by the petitioner.