G.R. NO. 160384 - CESAR T. HILARIO, FOR HIMSELF AND AS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT OF IBARRA, NESTOR, LINA AND PRESCILLA, ALL SURNAMED HILARIO, VS. ALLAN T. SALVADOR.

Ruling

WHEREFORE, it is prayed of this Honorable Court that after due process (sic), an order be issued for the defendant to vacate and peacefully turn over to the plaintiffs the occupied property and that defendant be made to pay plaintiffs: actual damages, as follows: a.1. transportation expenses in connection with the projected settlement of the case amounting to P1,500.00 and for the subsequent attendance to the hearing of this case at P1,500.00 each schedule; a.2. attorneys fees in the amount of P20,000.00 and P500.00 for every court appearance; moral and exemplary damages in such amount incumbent upon the Honorable Court to determine; and such other relief and remedies just and equitable under the premises. [4] The private respondent filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the nature of the action, citing Section 33 of Batas Pambansa (B.P.) Blg. 129, as amended by Section 3(3) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7691. [5] He averred that (1) the complaint failed to state the assessed value of the land in dispute; (2) the complaint does not sufficiently identify and/or describe the parcel of land referred to as the subject-matter of this action; both of which are essential requisites for determining the jurisdiction of the Court where the case is filed. In this case, however, the assessed value of the land in question is totally absent in the allegations of the complaint and there is nothing in the relief prayed for which can be picked-up for determining the Courts jurisdiction as provided by law. In the face of this predicament, it can nevertheless be surmised by reading between the lines, that the assessed value of the land in question cannot exceed P20,000.00 and, as such, it falls within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court of Romblon and should have been filed before said Court rather than before the RTC. [6] The petitioners opposed the motion. [7] They contended that the RTC had jurisdiction over the action since the court can take judicial notice of the market value of the property in question, which was P200.00 per square meter and considering that the property was 14,797 square meters, more or less, the total value thereof is P3,500,000.00. Besides, according to the petitioners, the motion to dismiss was premature and the proper time to interpose it is when the [petitioners] introduced evidence that the land is of such value. On November 7, 1996, the RTC issued an Order [8] denying the motion to dismiss, holding that the action was incapable of pecuniary estimation, and therefore, cognizable by the RTC as provided in Section 19(1) of B.P. Blg. 129, as amended. After the denial of the motion to dismiss, the private respondent filed his answer with counterclaim. [9] Traversing the material allegations of the complaint, he contended that the petitioners had no cause of action against him since the property in dispute was the conjugal property of his grandparents, the spouses Salustiano Salvad