G.R. NO. 143666 - SOLEDAD MENDOZA AND SPOUSES PHILIP AND MA. CARIDAD CASIÑO, VS. PURITA BAUTISTA.

Ruling

Accordingly, the case was remanded back to the trial court. Upon proper motion, [19] which was granted by the trial court, [20] respondent presented her evidence ex parte before the Branch Clerk of Court, [21] the gist of which, as summarized in the Decision of the trial court dated June 29, 1994, is as follows: It may be gleaned from said Report that on May 5, 1995, plaintiff, through counsel, presented herself as the sole witness in her behalf. She testified that: She was the previous lessee of a house and lot owned by defendants-spouses Peregil T. Raymundo and Soledad Mendoza located at 81 F. Blumentritt Street, Mandaluyong, Metro Manila from the year 1967 continuously up to 1990; In June 1990, she learned that the said house and lot where it was built was bought by defendants-spouses Philip and Caridad Zara Casiño from the spouses Raymundo by virtue of a Deed of Sale dated June 28, 1990 in the amount of forty-five thousand pesos (P45,000.00) wherein Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. 3618 was issued in the name of the buyers; The house and lot was not offered to her for sale before it was sold to the defendants-spouses Casiño. When she intimated to the defendants Raymundo her interest and desire to buy the house and lot, they refused and said that they were giving priority to and then sold said property to defendants-spouses Casiño; The said house was demolished on May 24, 1993 by defendant Casiño accompanied by some companions. She objected to such demolition but she could not stop them as they were many; Her personal properties valued at P30,000.00 inside the house were destroyed in the process of demolition as they were left behind because she was fearful of those who demolished the house; The complaint for ejectment over the subject house filed against her was dismissed by Judge Laqui and that there was an appeal but the defendants lost; Although she won in this case of ejectment, the house was still demolished as she was informed by the Casiños that she lost said case; She identified the present Complaint she filed which prayed that the title of said lot be cancelled and a new title be issued in her name as she has the money to pay for the subject lot as shown by the BPI Family Savings Account No. 0536234 in her name which contained a deposit of P51,414.33 as of September 25, 1992; and that She incurred about P50,000.00 as litigation expenses in pursuance of this case. [22] Based on the foregoing, the trial court held that respondent substantiated the allegations in her complaint and declared Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1517, or the Urban Land Reform Law, as the source of her right of first refusal. It held that she was covered under said law, being a legitimate tenant who has resided on the land for more than ten years, citing Joya vs. Court of Appeals . [23] Thus, the trial court rendered a decision in her favor, the dispositive portion of which reads: ACCORDINGLY and as prayed for, the defendants-spouses Philip G. Casiño and M