Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss claiming that the 8. That plaintiffs, in the latter period of 1993,
RTC has no jurisdiction over the case under Republic then demanded the removal of the subject
Act (R.A.) No. 7691, which expanded the exclusive house for the purpose of constructing a
original jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) commercial building and which herein
to include all civil actions which involve title to, or defendant refused and in fact now claims
possession of, real property, or any interest therein ownership of the portion in which said house
which does not exceed ₱20,000.00. He argued that stands;
since the 346 sq m lot which he owns adjacent to the
contested property has an assessed value of
Page 1 of 6
Quinagoran vs CA
9. That repeated demands relative to the agree with the court a quo's conclusion that the
removal of the subject house were hence complaint filed by the Heirs of Juan dela Cruz,
made but which landed on deaf ears; represented by Senen dela Cruz, is in the nature of
an accion publiciana and hence it is the Regional Trial
10. That a survey of the property as owned by Court which has jurisdiction over the action,
herein plaintiffs clearly establishes that the regardless of the assessed value of the property
subject house is occupying Four Hundred subject of present controversy.12
(400) square meters thereof at the north-west
portion thereof, as per the approved survey Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration was denied on
plan in the records of the Bureau of Lands. August 28, 2002 for lack of merit.13
Page 3 of 6
Quinagoran vs CA
xxxx jurisdiction would depend almost entirely on the
defendant.37
4. That plaintiffs inherited from x x x Juan dela
Cruz x x x a certain parcel of land x x x Considering that the respondents failed to allege in
containing an area of 13,111 square meters. their complaint the assessed value of the subject
property, the RTC seriously erred in denying the
5. That sometime in the mid-1960's, a house motion to dismiss. Consequently, all proceedings in
was erected on the north-west portion of the the RTC are null and void,38and the CA erred in
aforedescribed lot x x x. affirming the RTC.39
CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO
Jurisdiction of the court does not depend upon the Associate Justice
answer of the defendant or even upon agreement, Chairperson, Third Division
waiver or acquiescence of the parties.36 Indeed, the
jurisdiction of the court over the nature of the action CERTIFICATION
and the subject matter thereof cannot be made to
depend upon the defenses set up in the court or upon Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution,
a motion to dismiss for, otherwise, the question of and the Division Chairperson’s attestation, it is hereby
Page 4 of 6
Quinagoran vs CA
12
certified that the conclusions in the above Decision Id. at 50-53.
had been reached in consultation before the case was
assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s 13
Id. at 59.
Division.
14
Id. at 13.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice 15
Id. at 88.
16
Id. at 10-13.
17
Id. at 14.
Footnotes
18
Id. at 15.
1
Penned by Associate Justice Josefina
Guevara-Salonga, with Associate Justices 19
Id. at 62.
Eubulo G. Verzola and Bernardo P.
Abesamis, concurring; rollo, pp. 45-53. 20
Id. at 99.
2
Id. at 59. 21
Id.
3
Id. at 18-21. 22
Id. at 100.
4
Id. at 18-19. 23
AN ACT EXPANDING THE JURISDICTION
OF THE METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS,
The property is more particularly MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, AND
described as follows: MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS,
AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE BATAS
A parcel of land Lot No. 1807, Pls-149 PAMBANSA BLG. 129, OTHERWISE
(FV-7403) located at Centro, Piat, KNOWN AS THE "JUDICIARY
Cagayan, Bounded on the NE., by Lot REORGANIZATION ACT OF 1980".
1809, Pls-149 on the SE., by Lots
1810 and 1900, Pls-149; on the SW., 24
JUDICIARY REORGANIZATION ACT OF
by Public Land and on the NW., by Lot 1980.
1808, Pls-149. Containing an area of
Thirteen Thousand One Hundred 25
Republic Act No. 7691 took effect on April
(13,100) square meters, more or less,
15, 1994, Administrative Circ. No. 09-94.
covered by Original Certificate of Title
No. P-1670. 26
Rollo, p. 21.
5
Id. at 18-20. 27
See Aliabo v. Carampatan, 407 Phil. 31, 36
6 (2001).
Id. at 20.
28
7 G.R. No. 139561, June 10, 2003, 403
TCT No. T-4029 and covered by Tax
SCRA 517.
Declaration No. 6303, id. at 22.
29
8 Id. at 527-528.
Id. at 24-25.
30
9 Laresma v. Abellana, G.R. No. 140973,
Id. at 28.
November 11, 2004, 442 SCRA 156, 172.
10
Id. at 45. 31
Hilario v. Salvador, G.R. No. 160384, April
11
29, 2005, 457 SCRA 815, 824; Laresma v.
Id. at 53. Abellana, id. at 168.
Page 5 of 6
Quinagoran vs CA
32
Rollo, pp. 18-20.
33
See Laresma v. Abellana, supra note 30, at
173.
34
Hilario v. Salvador, supra note 31, at 826.
35
Id.
36
Id. at 824.
37
Laresma v. Abellana, supra note 30, at 168.
38
Id. at 173; Hilario v. Salvador, supra note
31, at 829.
39
Atuel v. Valdez, supra note 28, at 529.
Page 6 of 6