The issues to be determined ate incapable of pecuniary estimation, therefore, the

action shall be filed in the RTC where the property is situated.

Partition by agreement
If the co-owners agree by themselves , the court shall then confirm the partition,
and such partition, together with the order confirming the same, shall be recorded
in the RD.
If they cannot partition the property among themselves, the next stage in the
action will follow, the appointment of commissioners.
Partition by court-appointed commissioners
The court shall appoint not more than 3 commissioners who are competent and
disinterested persons, to make the partition. A mandatory requirement.
Nothing in the rules grants them the authority to adjudicate on questions of title or
ownership of the property. Rule 69 is not meant to prejudice, defeat or destroy the
rights of any person holding a title paramount to the title of the parties among
whom the partition shall have been made.
If the commissioners determine that the property cannot be divided without
prejudice to the interests of the parties, the court may order that the property be
assigned to one of the parties willing to take the same, provided he pays to the
other parties such amounts as the commissioners deem equitable. Instead of being
so assigned, an interested party may ask that the property be sold at a public sale.
Report of commissioners

67

IX. Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (Rule 70)

Accion interdictal
Forcible entry and unlawful detainer belongs to this class of action where the issue
is the right of physical possession of the subject real property independent of any
claim of ownership.
Forcible entry, one is deprived of physical possession by means of force,
intimidation, strategy, threats or stealth (FISTS). Possession is illegal from the
beginning.
Unlawful detainer, one illegally withholds possession after expiration or termination
of his right to hold possession under any contract. Possession was originally legal
but became illegal due to expiration or termination of the right.
Jurisdiction of this 2 actions, summary in nature, is with the MTC, which must be
brought within 1 year from date of actual entry on the land, in case of forcible
entry, and from the date of last demand, in case of unlawful detainer.
Accion publiciana and accion revindicatoria
Accion publiciana is the plenary action to recover the right of possession which
should be brought when the dispossession has lasted for more than 1 year. It is an
ordinary proceeding to determine the better right of possession of realty
independent of title.
Accion revindicatoria involves not only possession, but ownership. 2 things must
be alleged and proven:
o The identity of the property; and

o Plaintiffs title to it.

Possession as the issue
Possession in the eyes of the law does not mean that a mans has to have his feet
on every square meter of the ground before he is deemed in possession.
Where the basic issue is not possession but interpretation, enforcement and/or
rescission of the contract, the same is no longer an ejectment suit.
Where there is a claim of ownership and the action seeks to recover from the
defendant including the possession of the property, the action is not longer
interdictal but an accion revindicatoria.
Summary nature of the actions
Designed to provide for an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or
the right to possession of the property involved.
Both fall under the coverage of the Rules on Summary Procedure irrespective of
the amount of damages.
Real and in personam actions
Affects the possession of real property, hence, are real actions. The venue is the
place where the property subject of the action is situated.
They are also actions in personam because the plaintiff seeks to enforce a personal
obligation to vacate and restore physical possession to the plaintiff.

Jurisdiction of the MTC; summary procedure

Two allegations are mandatory for the MTC to acquire jurisdiction:
a. The plaintiff must allege his prior physical possession of the property;
b. He must also allege that he was deprived of his possession by any of the
means provided for in Sec. 1 Rule 70.
If the alleged dispossession did not occur by any of these means, the proper
recourse is to file not an accion interdictal but for a plenary action to recover
possession.
Effect of pendency of an action involving ownership of the action for forcible entry
and unlawful detainer
Does not bar the filing of an ejectment suit, nor suspend the proceedings of one
already instituted.
The underlying reason is to prevent the defendant from trifling with the summary
nature of an ejectment suit.
Examples:
a. An injunction suit filed in the RTC by the defendant in the ejectment suit;
b. An accion publiciana in another court between the same parties in the ejectment
suit;
c. An action fro quieting of title involving the same property and the same parties;
d. Suit for specific performance with damages;
e. An accion revindicatoria in another court between the same parties
f.
An action for reformation;

68

g. An action for annulment of sale or title between the same parties.

Distinctions between forcible entry and unlawful detainer
Forcible Entry
Possession of defendant is illegal from
the beginning having deprived the
lawful possessor by FISTS
FISTS include every situation or
condition under which one person can
wrongfully enter upon real property to
exclude another
Plaintiff must allege and prove prior
physical
possession
Demand to vacate is not required
The 1 year period to file is counder from
the date of actual entry of defendant.
Entry is by stealth, 1 year from learning

Unlawful Detainer
Possession of the defendant was lawful
from the beginning which subsequently
became illegal
An allegation that the defendant is
unlawfully withholding possession from
plaintiff is deemed sufficient
Allegation is not required

Demand to vacate is necessary

The 1 year period is counted from the
date of last demand in case of nonpayment or violation of the conditions

such

When defendant occupies premises by mere tolerance

His possession becomes unlawful upon failure to comply with the demand to
vacate form the owner. Unlawful withholding is counted from the date of demand.
It is essential that plaintiffs supposed acts of tolerance must have been present
right from the start of the possession which is later sought to the recovered.
A person who occupies the land of another at the latters tolerance, without any
contract is necessarily bound
by an implied promise that he will vacate upon
demand.
Demand in unlawful detainer cases
An unlawful detainer case shall be commenced only after demand to pay or comply
with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made.
To understand the manner of the required demand, attention need be given to the
phraseology of Sec 2 Rule 70:
o
Where the suit is based on the defendants failure to pay the rentals
agreed upon, the proper demand should be to pay and to vacate. If
the demand is to
pay or vacate, it does not make out a case for
unlawful detainer.
o Where the suit is predicated upon the defendants noncompliance with
the conditions of the lease contract, the proper demand should be to
comply and to vacate. If the demand is to comply or to vacate, the
demand gives rise to an action for specific performance.
If a case
for a sum of money if filed with the RTC, but the allegations clearly
indicate that the action is one for ejectment, a motion to dismiss is proper.
The mere failure of an occupant to pay rentals or his failure to comply with the
conditions of the lease does no ipso facto render his possession of the premises
unlawful


Form of demand

Written notice served upon the person found in the premises. The demand may
also be made by posting a written notice on the premises if no person can be
found.

Demand upon a tenant may be oral, however, sufficient evidence must be adduced
to show that there was indeed a demand.
Effect of non-compliance with the demand

15 days in case of land, 5 days in case of building, lessor may now proceed
against the lessee.
Defense of tenancy

Defendant raises the issue of tenancy and alleges that it falls under the jurisdiction
of the DARAB, it would be error for the court to dismiss the complaint on that
ground alone. The mere raising of the issue tenancy does not automatically divest
the court of jurisdiction because, jurisdiction is determined by the allegation of the
complaint.

Where tenancy is raised as a defense, the court must conduct a preliminary

hearing on the matter. If during the hearing, it is shown that tenancy is the real
issue, then the court shall dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.

Defense of ownership

Does not serve to divest the inferior court of its jurisdiction.

The court may resolve the issue of ownership but only under the ff conditions:
a. When the issue of possession cannot be resolved without resolving the issue
of ownership; and
b. The issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of
possession. Such judgment would not bar an action between the same parties
respecting the title. It is merely interlocutory.
How to obtain possession of the premises during the pendency of the action

When the action is filed, the plaintiff is not in possession of the property. To obtain
possession, Sec. 15 permits the plaintiff to present a motion, within 5 days from the
filing of the complaint, for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction
to restore him in his possession.

If the judgment of the MTC is appealed, the RTC may issue a writ of mandatory
injunction to restore the plaintiff in his possession, upon motion of the plaintiff within
10 days from perfection of the appeal.
Damages recoverable

Those corresponding to the sum justly due as arrears of rent or reasonable

compensation for the use and occupation of the premises.
Immediate execution of judgment

69

To avoid injustice to a lawful possessor, and the courts duty to order the execution
if practically ministerial.
Applies only when the judgment is against the defendant.

How to stay immediate execution of the judgment

The defendant must take the ff:

a. Perfect an appeal;
b. File a supersedeas bond; and
c. Deposit periodically with the RTC, during the pendency of the appeal,
adjudicated amount of rent due or the reasonable value of the use of
property.

The supersedeas bond covers the monetary judgment of the lower court. It
judgment does not make any pronouncement as to the pecuniary liability of
defendant, the bond shall not be required. Attorneys fees are not covered by
bond.

the
the
the
the
the

Where to appeal

At the appropriate RTC. The mode of appeal is under Rule 40.

Person bound by the judgment in ejectment cases

GR: binding only upon parties properly impleaded and given an opportunity
to be heard.

Exception:
a. A sublessee is bound by the judgment against the lessee;
b. A guest or successor in interest, the members of the family or the servants of
the lessee;
c. Trespassers, squatters or agents of the defendant fraudulently occupyint the
property to frustrate the judgment; and
d. Transferees pendenet lite and other privies of the defendant.
X. Contempt (Rule 71)
Meaning of contempt

Disobedience to the court by acting in opposition to its authority, justice and dignity.
Signifies not only a willful disregard or disobedience of the courts orders but also
conduct tending to bring the authority of the court and the administration of law into
disrepute.

The power to declare a person in contempt is an inherent power lodged in the

courts of justice, to be used as a means to protect and preserve:
a. The dignity of the court;
b. The solemnity of the proceedings; and
c. The administration of justice from callous misbehavior, offensive personalities
and contumacious refusal to comply with court orders.
Functions of contempt
1. Vindication of public interest by punishment of contemptuous conduct;

2.

Coercion to compel the contemnor to do what the law requires him to uphold the
power of the court, and also to secure the rights of the parties to a suit awarded
by the court.

Civil

Conduct directed
against
the
authority
and
dignity of
the
court or a judge
acting judicially;
it
is
an
obstructing
the
administration of
justice
which
tends to bring
the court into
disrepute.
The failure to do
something
ordered to
be
done be a court
or a judge for
the benefit of the
opposing
party
and is therefore,
an offense made
against the party
in whose behalf
the
violated
order was made.

Distinction
Procedure
To vindicate the Conducted in accordance
authority of the with the principles and rules
court
and applicable to criminal cases,
protect
its in so far as such is
outraged
consistent with the summary
personality.
nature of contempt.

Failure to
do The rules of procedure of a
something
criminal contempt procedure
ordered by
a are inapplicable.
court to be done
for the benefit of
a party.

Kinds of contempt
Direct contempt
generally committed in the presence of or so near the court or judge or interrupt
the proceedings before the same.
Acts constituting direct contempt
a. Misbehavior in the presence of or so near the court or judge or interrupt the
proceedings before the same;
b. Disrespect toward the court;
c. Offensive personalities towards others;
d. Refusal to be sworn as a witness or to answer as a witness;
e. Refusal to subscribe an affidavit or despostion when lawfully required;
f. Willful and deliberate forum shopping;

70

bring it into disrepute.

No formal proceeding required

The court may summarily adjudge one in direct contempt

Kinds of contempt
Criminal

g. Unfounded accusations or allegation or words tending to embarrass the court of to

Penalty
if the act constituting direct contempt was committed against an RTC or a court of
equivalent or higher rank, the penalty is a fine not exceeding P2,000 or
imprisonment not exceeding 10 days, or both;
If the act constituting direct contempt was committed against a lower court, the
penalty is a fine not exceeding P200 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 day, or both.
If the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do an act, he may be
imprisoned by order of the court concerned until he performs it.
Remedy of a person adjudged in direct contempt
A person adjudged in direct contempt, may not appeal. His remedy is a petition for
certiorari or prohibition directed against the court.
Pending resolution, the execution of the judgment for direct contempt shall be
suspended. The suspension however, shall take place only if the person adjudged
in contempt files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment. The
bond is conditioned upon his performance of the judgment should the petition be
decided against him.
Indirect contempt
An act done at a distance which tends to belittle, degrade, obstruct, or embarrass
the court.
Generally committed by a person who commits any of the ff acts:
a. Disobedience or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order or judgment
of a court;
b. Any abuse or any unlawful interference with the process or proceedings
of a court not constituting direct contempt; and
c. Any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct,
or degrade the administration of justice.
Contempt in relation to execution of judgments
Generally, contempt is not a means of enforcing a judgment. Mere refusal of the
judgment debtor to vacate the property is not a sufficient ground to hold him in
contempt. The writ of possession was directed to the judgment debtor but to the
sheriff. As the writ did not command the judgment debtor to do anything, he
cannot be guilty of the acts described in Rule 71.
The proper procedure is not for the court to cite the debtor in contempt. What the
officer should do is to dispossess him of the property but if after the dispossession,
the judgment debtor should execute acts of ownership or possession or in any
manner disturb the possession of the judgment creditor, then only then may he be
punished for contempt.
If the judgment is one for the payment of money, the sheriff shall demand from
the judgment obligor the immediate payment. If the judgment obligor does not

comply with the demand, it is believed no contempt charges could lie against the judgment obligor. If the obligor is unable to pay in any acceptable mode of payment, the remedy of the
sheriff is not to initiate contempt but to levy upon the properties of the debtor.
When the subject of execution is a special judgment, one that can only be complied with only by the judgment obligor or the officer directed by the judgment, may be punished by
contempt if he disobeys the judgment.
An officer against whom a writ of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, was issued who disobeys is may be punished by contempt.

How a proceeding for indirect contempt is commenced

An act constituting an indirect contempt is to be punished only after a charge in writing and a hearing. The requirement is to prevent the court from issuing process to bring the respondent
into court, or from holding him in custody pending the proceedings.

Procedural requisites:
1. A charge in writing to be filed;
2. An opportunity for the person charged to appear and explain his conduct; and
3. To be heard by himself or counsel.

There are only 2 ways a person can be charged with direct contempt:
a. Through a verified petition; and
b. By order or formal charge initiated by the court motu propio.
1. If initiated motu propio by the court, it is commenced by an order of the same court or any formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be
punished.
2. If initiated by someone other than the court, it is commenced by a verified petition accompanied by supporting particulars.

If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a principal action pending in court, the petition for contempt shall allege such fact but the petition shall be docketed, heard and
decided separately form the principal action. The court, in the exercise of its discretion may order the consolidation.
Necessity for hearing

A respondent in a contempt chare must be served with a copy of the petition. While the respondent is not required to file a formal answer similar to that in ordinary civil actions, the court
must set the contempt charge for hearing on a fixed date and time on which the respondent must make his appearance to answer. On the date and time of the hearing, the court shall
proceed to investigate the charges and consider such answer as the respondent may make.

If he fails to appear, the court may order his arrest. The court does not declare the respondent in default.

Hearing is not ordered, respondent may be released from custody upon the filing of a bond for his appearance at the hearing.
Court where the charge for indirect contempt is to be filed

Depends upon the level of the court which the contempt was committed

a.
b.
c.

When the act was committed against an RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or against an officer appointed by it, the charge may be filed with such court.
Where the act was committed against a lower court, the charge may be filed with the RTC in which the lower court is sitting. It may also be filed in the lower court against which
the contempt was allegedly committed. The decision is appeallable to the RTC.
Where the act was committed against persons or entities exercising quasi-judicial functions, the charge shall be filed in the RTC of the place wherein the contempt was
committed.

Punishment for indirect contempt

a. Where the act was committed against an RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, he may be punished by a fine not exceeding P30,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or
both.
b. Where the act was committed against a lower court, he may be punished by a fine not exceeding P5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 month, or both.
c. Where the act was committed against a person or entity exercising quasi-judicial functions the penalty imposed shall depend upon the provisions of the law which authorizes the penalty
for contempt against such persons or entities.
Imprisonment

This may be resorted to where the attendant circumstances are such that the non-compliance with the court order is an utter disregard of the authority of the court which has not other
recourse by to use its coercive power.

The punishment is imposed for the benefit of a complainant or a party to a suit who has been injured aside from the need to compel performance.

It is only the judge who orders the confinement of a person for contempt of court who could issue the Order of Release.
Remedy of a person adjudged in indirect contempt

He may appeal form the judgment or final order of the court in the same manner as in criminal cases. The appeal will not however, have the effect of suspending the judgment if the
person adjudged in contempt does not file a bond in an amount fixed by the court.
Contempt against quasi-judicial entities.

Rule 71 applies only to contempt committed against persons or entities exercising quasi-judicial functions.

Quasi-judicial bodies that that have the power to cite person for in contempt pursuant to Rule 71 can only do so by initiating them in the proper RTC.