Civil Procedure

Civil Procedure A satisfied Microsoft Office User Normal A satisfied Microsoft Office User 2 7 2002-01-10T09:48:00Z 2002-01-10T09:48:00Z 2 752 4290 sc 35 8 5268 9.2720 120

9. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer

1. Nature of Accion Interdictal

It is:

(1) a special civil action involving a realty;

(2) subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure;

(3) under the original exclusive jurisdiction of first level courts;

(4) nature of the action is determined by the allegation of the complaint and the character of the relief sought; 460 and

(5) one co-owner may institute the action.

2. Immediate Execution and How to Stay It

A decision ejecting the defendant in a forcible entry or unlawful detainer case is immediately executory. But the judge should not order immediate execution in his decision. 461 There must be notice of the judgment 462 and a motion with notice to the adverse party. 463

To stay execution, the defendant should:

(1) perfect his appeal in due time;

(2) files a sufficient supersedeas bond, approved by the Municipal Trial Court; and

(3) during the pendency of the appeal, s/he deposits with the appellate court the amount of rent due from time to time under the contract, if any, as determined by the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court on or before the tenth (10 th ) day of each succeeding month. 464 But upon motion of the plaintiff within ten (10) days from the perfection of the appeal to the Regional Trial Court, the court may still issue a preliminary mandatory injunction to restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is satisfied that the defendant's appeal is frivolous or dilatory, or that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie meritorious. 465

3. Important Decisional Rules on Unlawful Detainer

3.1 A covenant to renew a lease contract which makes no provision as to the renewal or extension implies an extension or renewal upon the same terms as provided in the original lease contract. 466

3.2 An action for ejectment is not abated by the death of the defendant. 467 The heirs become the substitute defendants. 468

3.3 Where there is a defense of tenancy, there must be a preliminary hearing on the question of tenancy relations. 469 If there is a prima facie showing of tenancy, the court should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction (jurisdiction belongs to the DARAB). 470

3.4 The lessee is not permitted to deny the lessor's title. 471

3.5 A person who occupies the land of another at the latter's tolerance or permission, without any contract between them is necessarily bound by an implied promise that he will vacate upon demand, failing which an action for unlawful detainer may be instituted against him. 472

This rule as to tolerance does not hold true in a case where there was forcible entry at the start, but the lawful possessor did not attempt to oust the intruder for over one (1) year, and only thereafter filed forcible entry suit following demand to vacate. 473

Elsewise stated, the tolerance must be presented right from the start of possession sought to be recovered to categorize a cause of action as one of unlawful detainer. 474

3.6 Demand upon a tenant may be oral. 475 If demand is made upon the person found on the premises, it must be done by serving upon him notice of such demand or by posting such notice on the premises if no person be found thereon. 476

3.7 When failure to pay rent or comply with the condition of lease is the ground for ejectment, plaintiff should give two (2) demands:

(1) demand to pay rental or comply with conditions of the lease and if this is not complied with,

(2) demand to vacate within fifteen (15) days in case of land or five (5) days in case of buildings from notice thereof. The two (2) demands may be embodied in one (1) letter. 477 Demand to pay or comply makes lessee a deforciant while demand to pay and vacate is a requirement for filing the action for unlawful detainer.

3.8 When the lease has expired, there is no need of prior demand to vacate. The lessor can immediately file an action for ejectment. Demand is necessary only when the ground for ejectment is failure to pay rent or comply with the conditions of the lease. 478

Notice and demand to vacate is, however, required on a lease on a month-to-month period to render effective the termination of the lease upon the expiration of the month, and prevent an implied renewal of the lease. 479

The notice provision is the one given after the expiration of the lease period for the purpose of aborting an implied renewal of the lease. 480

3.9 An alternative demand to either renew the expired lease contract at a higher rental rate or vacate is not a definite demand to vacate and therefore, insufficient basis for the filing of an action for unlawful detainer. 481

3.10 When there is no definite period for a lease but rental is paid from month to month, then under Article 1687 (Civil Code), the period is fixed which is from month to month. When the lessor gave the lessee a demand to vacate at the end of the month and he fails to do so, an action for unlawful detainer may be filed against him. 482

3.11 Refusal to collect or accept rentals is not a defense. There must be consignation. 483 Acceptance of back rentals after demand to vacate does not legitimize possession. 484 Consignation must be where Sec. 5(b) provides either in court or in bank, in the name of and with notice to the lessor and not elsewhere. 485

460 Abrin v. Campos, G. R. No. 52740, November 12, 1991, 203 SCRA 420.

461 Lu v. Siapno, G. R. No. A. M. MTJ-3-99-1199, July 6, 2000; Felongco v. Dictado, A. M. No. RTJ-8650, June 28, 1993, 223 SCRA 696.

462 Dy v. Court of Appeals, G. R. No. 93756, March 22, 1991, 195 SCRA 585.

463 Kaw v. Anunciacion, A. M. No. MTJ-93-811, 242 SCRA 1.

464 Rules of Court, Rule 70, Sec. 19.

465 Ibid., Sec. 20.

466 Ledesma v. Javellana , No. L-55187, April 28, 1983, 121 SCRA 794.

467 Vda. de Salazar v. Court of Appeals , G. R. No. 121510, November 23, 1995, 250 SCRA 305.

468 Ca�iza v. Court of Appeals , G. R. No. 110427, February 24, 1997, 268 SCRA 640.

469 Ignacio v. Court of First Instance of Bulacan , No. L-27897-98, October 29, 1971, 42 SCRA 89; Bayog v. Natino , G. R. No. 118691, July 5, 1996, 258 SCRA 378.

470 Baranda v. Padios , No. L-61371, October 21, 1987, 154 SCRA 720.

471 Rules of Court, Rule 131, Sec. 3 (b); Reyes v. Villaflor , No. L-15755, May 30, 1961, 2 SCRA 247.

472 Dakudao v. Consolacion , No. L-54753, June 24, 1983, 122 SCRA 877.

473 Mu�oz v. Court of Appeals, G. R. No. 102693, September 23, 1992, 214 SCRA 216.

474 Refugia v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 118284 July 5, 1996, 258 SCRA 211.

475 Jakihaca v. Aquino , G. R. No. 83982, January 12, 1990, 181 SCRA 67.

476 Rules of Court, Rule 70, Sec. 2.

477 Zobel v. Abreu, 52 O.G. No. 7, 3592 (July 16, 1956).

478 Co Tiamco v. Diaz , 75 Phil. 672 [1946).

479 Rivera v. Florendo, supra, note 351; Yap v. Cruz, G. R. No. 89307, May 8, 1992, 208 SCRA 692.

480 Chua v. Court of Appeals, G. R. No. L-106573 March 27, 1995, 60 SCRA 57; Gamboa's Incorporated v. Court of Appeals, No. L-23634, July 29, 1976, 72 SCRA 131.

481 Penas, Jr. v. Court of Appeals , G. R. No. 112734, July 7, 1994, 233 SCRA 744.

482 Crisostomo v. Court of Appeals , No. L-43427 August 30, 1982, 116 SCRA 199.

483 Velez v. Avelino , No. L-48448, February 20, 1984, 127 SCRA 602; Soco v. Militante , No. L-58961, June 28, 1983, 123 SCRA 160; Uy v. Court of Appeals , G. R. No. 78538, October 25, 1989, 178 SCRA 671.

484 Cursino v. Bautista , G. R. No. 50335, August 7, 1989, 176 SCRA 65.

485 Medina v. Court of Appeals , G. R. No. 104615, August 24, 1993, 225 SCRA 607.