Cited Laws
ACCORDINGLY, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant, ordering the defendant: (a) To vacate the premises of plaintiffs' titled property, identified as Lot No. H-210949, and to demolish and remove all improvements that he had introduced thereon; (b) To pay to the plaintiffs the sum of P6,000.00 representing the value of the 30 trees cut down from the plaintiffs' titled land; (c) To pay to the plaintiffs the amount of P500.00 as rental, per hectare, per month, for the use and occupation of plaintiffs titled property, from March 14, 1990 until he vacates the premises; (d) To pay the plaintiffs the amount of P5,000.00 for and as attorney's fees, the amount of P1,500.00 as litigation expenses; [and] (e) To pay the cost of the action. The application for injunction is hereby granted. [7] The MTCC held: Under the law, registered land owners are entitled to full enjoyment of their property without other limitations than those established by law (Art. 428, NCC) and to the exclusion of all others (Art. 429, NCC). xxx Defendant appears to contend that the area in question was/is still part of the Forest Zone, and, therefore, he has better right thereto by virtue of the lease agreement, hence, no forcible entry case will lie. The fact, however, remains that the lot titled now in the names of the plaintiffs was originally acquired by one Marcelino Patoc through homestead patent duly approved by the President of the Republic of the Philippines on August 15, 1940. Plaintiffs and their predecessors-in-interest have been in possession and occupation of the land for about fifty (50) years[.] xxx Definitely, the so-called survey plan prepared only lately cannot prevail over the title issued to Mr. Marcelino Patoc fifty (50) years ago. xxx The evidence on record sustains the contention of plaintiffs that indeed defendant illegally entered, possessed and occupied a big portion of their titled property, measuring an area of about 11.5 hectares, cut down the trees thereon, converted them into lumber and used the same in the construction of bunk/shade houses; that about 30 trees had been cut down with a conservative value of P200.00 per tree, and that the reasonable rental for the occupation and use of the questioned area is P500.00 per hectare, per month; that because of the acts of the defendant, plaintiffs had to retain the services of counsel at a stipulated fee of P20,000.00, and to incur expenses of litigation, which appear uncontroverted since no position paper and counter affidavits of witnesses had been submitted to refute said claim, although the copies of xxx [plaintiff's] position paper and supplemental position paper and affidavits of witnesses had been served on defendant, through counsel. [8] Petitioner appealed to the Regional Trial Court, Zamboanga City, Branch 17 ("RTC"). Aside from reiterating his claim that he entered the Lot under the Lease Agreement, petitioner also raised new claims, namely, that (1) prescr