Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 126 views

    Provos Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Benedick Ledesma
    The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and ruled in favor of the respondents, Victor and Fe Ramos. The Ramos couple claimed the petitioners, the Provosts, had encroached on their land based on an old survey plan and deed of donation. While the Provosts argued they owned the land based on a corrected survey plan and deed of absolute sale. The Court of Appeals found the Provosts had reduced the size of the Ramos' adjoining property without right by moving the common boundary.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Provos Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Benedick Ledesma
    126 views1 page
    The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and ruled in favor of the respondents, Victor and Fe Ramos. The Ramos couple claimed the petitioners, the Provosts, had encroached on their land based on an old survey plan and deed of donation. While the Provosts argued they owned the land based on a corrected survey plan and deed of absolute sale. The Court of Appeals found the Provosts had reduced the size of the Ramos' adjoining property without right by moving the common boundary.

    Original Description:

    civpro case digest

    Original Title

    REmedial

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and ruled in favor of the respondents, Victor and Fe Ramos. The Ramos couple claimed the petitioners, the Provosts, had encroached on their land based on an old survey plan and deed of donation. While the Provosts argued they owned the land based on a corrected survey plan and deed of absolute sale. The Court of Appeals found the Provosts had reduced the size of the Ramos' adjoining property without right by moving the common boundary.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    126 views1 page

    Provos Vs Court of Appeals

    Uploaded by

    Benedick Ledesma
    The Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and ruled in favor of the respondents, Victor and Fe Ramos. The Ramos couple claimed the petitioners, the Provosts, had encroached on their land based on an old survey plan and deed of donation. While the Provosts argued they owned the land based on a corrected survey plan and deed of absolute sale. The Court of Appeals found the Provosts had reduced the size of the Ramos' adjoining property without right by moving the common boundary.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    PROVOS vs COURT OF APPEALS

    FACTS:

    Respondents Victor and Fe Ramos are the owners of a parcel of land in


    Putingbalas, Tupsan Grande. Sometime in May 1992, the Provosts, the
    petitioners, constructed a fence separating the two lots. In 1994, the
    respondents demanded the return of the area of their lot that they believe
    the petitioners encroached on, but the latter refused. The respondents thus
    had a relocation survey, which showed that the fence was indeed on their
    land. The petitioners disagreed, arguing that the cadastral survey plan used
    had been disapproved as defective. The Ramos couple anchor their claim
    on the deed of donation and an old survey plan, while the Provosts base
    theirs on the deed of absolute sale and the corrected survey plan.

    The MTC dismissed the respondents’ complaint and held that they failed to
    prove their ownership and possession of the disputed area. Upon appeal,
    the RTC affirmed the MTC decision, stating that the claim by the Ramoses
    over the property was based on a disapproved survey plan. In reversing the
    RTC decision, the Court of Appeals reasoned that the petitioners had no
    right to move the common boundary such that the area of the adjoining lot
    was reduced to 3,552 square meters.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the Provosts encroached on the property of the Ramoses.

    HELD:

    Rules on Civil Procedure allow the RTC, which have the jurisdiction over
    complaints for recovery of ownership, to decide on cases brought on appeal
    from the MTC which, even without jurisdiction over the subject matter,
    may decide the case on its merits. In this case, the MTC of Mambajao
    should have dismissed the complaint outright for lack of jurisdiction but
    since it decided the case on its merits, the RTC rendered a decision based
    on the findings of the MTC.

    You might also like