TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, with the sole modification that the awards for damages and attorney’s fees are hereby deleted, the judgment appealed from is, in all other respects, AFFIRMED . Without costs.” [3] The CA affirmed the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Decision, [4] rendered on October 30, 1996, which decreed thus: “WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds, holds and declares that defendant Belen Ocampo-Barrito, married to Vicente Barrito, are the true and lawful exclusive owners of the following proper…
WHEREFORE, with the sole modification that the awards for damages and attorneys fees are hereby deleted, the judgment appealed from is, in all other respects, AFFIRMED . Without costs. [3] The CA affirmed the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Decision, [4] rendered on October 30, 1996, which decreed thus: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds, holds and declares that defendant Belen Ocampo-Barrito, married to Vicente Barrito, are the true and lawful exclusive owners of the following properties, namely: (a) A parcel of residential/commercial land situated in the poblacion of Nabua, Camarines Sur, bounded on the NE by Carmen Ocampo and Alberto Espiritu, on the SE by the Burgos Street, on the SW by a street, and on the NW by Julian Ocampo and Carmen Ocampo, containing an area of 1,119 square meters, more or less, presently covered by TCT No. 13654 in the name of Belen Ocampo-Barrito, married to Vicente Barrito and previously covered by TCT No. RT-4389(983) in the name of Fidela Ocampo, declared under TD No. 18856 and assessed at P17,240.00. (b) A parcel of residential land situated at San Luis, Nabua, Camarines Sur, bounded on the North and East by a barrio road, on the South by a creek, and on the West by Lot 237, with an area of about 300 square meters, declared under TD No. 19639 with an assessed value of P6,240.00. (c) A parcel of land situated at Sto. Domingo, Nabua, Camarines Sur, bounded on the North by Lot 10323, on the East by Lot 9543, on the South by Lot 10325, and on the West by Lot 10322, with an area of about 4884 square meters, declared under TD No. 35122 and assessed at P6780.00 as described and referred to in paragraph 9, sub-paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the original complaint and it is hereby ordered that: The complaint and supplemental complaint are dismissed for failure of the plaintiffs to prove their cause/causes of action by preponderance of evidence and on the added ground of prescription; The plaintiffs are ordered to pay as their joint and several obligation, to defendants Fidela Ll. Ocampo, Belen Ocampo-Barrito and Vicente Barrito, the total sum of P15,000.00 for attorneys fees and other expenses of litigation and P50,000.00 for moral damages; The plaintiffs jointly and severally pay the cost of this suit. Upon the finality of this decision, the notice of lis pendens annotated at plaintiffs behest in the Certificates of Title covering the properties in question, of defendants be cancelled; and the plaintiffs, their agents and representatives as well as successors-in-interest are ordered to respect the right of ownership of said defendants thereto, and to vacate and restore the lawful possession of all portions of said properties to herein defendants, their agents, representatives and successors-in-interest. [5] The Facts The CA adopted the RTCs summation of facts as follows: Notwithstanding its somewhat deficient grammar and syntax, the following summation of the relevant and material antecedents of the case b
G.R. No. 158377 - HEIRS OF JOSE REYES, JR., NAMELY: MAGDALENA C. REYES, OSCAR C. REYES, GAMALIEL C. REYES, NENITA R. DELA CRUZ, RODOLFO C. REYES, AND RODRIGO C. REYES, VS. AMANDA S. REYES, CONSOLACION S. REYES, EUGENIA R. ELVAMBUENA, LUCINA R. MENDOZA, PEDRITO S. REYES, MERLINDA R. FAMODULAN, EDUARD
G.R. No. 158377 -
CaseG.R. NO. 158646 - HEIRS OF JESUS M. MASCUÑANA, REPRESENTED BY JOSE MA. R. MASCUÑANA, VS. COURT OF APPEALS, AQUILINO BARTE, AND SPOUSES RODOLFO AND CORAZON LAYUMAS.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. NO. 158646 -
CaseG.R. No. 131803 - SOTERA PAULINO MARCELO, GABRIELA M. ANGELES, SIMEONA CUENCO, EMILIA MARCELO AND RUBEN MARCELO, VS. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, FERNANDO CRUZ AND SERVANDO FLORES. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 131803 -