Mangahas Vs CA CASE DIGEST
Mangahas Vs CA CASE DIGEST
Mangahas Vs CA CASE DIGEST
Facts: NO.
April 1955- Sps. Rodil occupied and possessed the As to ACQUISITIVE PRESCRIPTION
subject property.
The possession of Sps. Rodil, from whom he traces the
February 1, 1971- Sps. Rodil sold the land to Sps. Cayme origin of his supposed title, commenced only in April
for P7,000. On the same day, Sps. Cayme applied for Free 1955. The complaint was filed on February 25, 1985.
Patent which was eventually approved by the Bureau of Hence, the requirement of at least 30 years continuous
Lands. So, ROD issued an OCT in their favor. possession has not been complied with even if we were
to tack Rodils period of possession.
Before the sale in 1971, Servando Mangahas (Mangahas
for brevity) had been in possession thereof by virtue of As to POSSESSION (in re 525 and 540).
the agreement between Mangahas and Sps. Rodil
Furthermore, the possession of Mangahas here is not in
allowing Mangahas to occupy and cultivate the said
the concept of an owner, therefore, it could not ripen
parcel of land.
into acquisitive prescription.
Even after the sale, Mangahas was permitted by Sps.
The requisites for acquiring dominion are the ff:
Cayme to continue possessing and working on the same
land upon the request of Sps. Cayme themselves because 1. Possession must be actual or constructive.
they were then busy. 2. It must be in the concept of an owner.
Sps. Cayme tolerated Mangahas possession until While it may be true that Mangahas was in actual
February 5, 1985, when they commenced the present possession of the property, he was not holding it in the
action for recovery of possession and the possession of concept of an owner. He was in possession of the
real property. property by mere tolerance.
Sps. Cayme demanded from Mangahas the return of the
land but Mangahas refused to vacate the place.
ISSUE: