G.R. No. 236619 - HEIRS OF MANUEL EÑANO, REPRESENTED BY VIRGILIO A. BOTE, VS. SAN PEDRO CINEPLEX PROPERTIES, INC..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly declared respondent in default. The CA thereafter affirmed the RTC's ruling. Subsequently, this Court denied outright the petition for review on certiorari. On motion for reconsideration, this Court ruled that respondent's answer should have been admitted as it was filed before the declaration of default and no prejudice was caused to the petitioners. Consequently, the case was remanded to the RTC of San Pedro for appropriate action. [18] Meanwhile, regarding respondent's Complaint for Forcible Entry, the Municipal Trial Court of San Pedro, Laguna (MTC of San Pedro) found that respondent constructively possessed the subject property. It then directed petitioners and Virgilio to vacate the parcels of land covered by TCT Nos. T-309608, T-309609 and T-309610. [19] The RTC of San Pedro reversed said decision, but the CA reinstated the decision of the MTC of San Pedro, holding that respondent was in peaceful possession of the subject property since 1994 until petitioners entered the premises in 2006. [20] When the case reached this Court, We, in our July 27, 2009 Resolution, [21] resolved to remand the same to the MTC of San Pedro to determine whose certificate of title covered the subject property, and to grant possession to the proper party. [22] The survey of the properties described under petitioners' TCT No. T-35050 and respondent's TCT Nos. T-309608, T-309609 and T-309610 confirmed that said certificates of title covered one and the same lot. Consequently, the MTC of San Pedro, in its February 16, 2011 Order, [23] sustained its previous decision and ordered petitioners and Virgilio to vacate the subject property. Acting on the remand and in pursuit to resolve the Quieting of Title case with dispatch, the RTC proceeded with the pre-trial where the petitioners and respondent stipulated on the following: (1) that respondent was issued with Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Registration No. 007128 on August 9, 1994; (2) that the Decision on the Ejectment (Forcible Entry) case exists; and (3) that the certificates of title exist. [24] Trial on the merits ensued, petitioners and respondent presented their respective narrations. Version of the Petitioners On May 13, 1965, Manuel bought the subject property from the Spouses Gliceria Kasubuan (Gliceria) and Apolonio Morando for P35,000.00 as evidenced by a Deed of Absolute Sale. [25] As a result of the sale, TCT No. T-35050 [26] was issued in the name of Manuel on even date. The subject property was likewise covered by Tax Declaration No. 24-0007-12938. [27] To support the petitioners' claim, Virgilio recounted in his Judicial Affidavit [28] that Manuel and his predecessors continuously occupied the subject property since 1965 and that taxes due thereon had been paid until 2008. [29] When the complaint for forcible entry was filed, Virgilio discovered that respondent's Transfer Certificates of Title were fictitious because they originated from an unnotarized and undated Deed of Sale [3