Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 70 views

    EVICTION EXAMPLEs

    Uploaded by

    Yeshua Tura
    This document summarizes a court case regarding a warranty of title. The plaintiff, Tiana, had sold land to the defendant, Torrejon, who was then evicted from the land due to a prior right. Tiana sued Torrejon to recover the sale price based on the warranty of title. The court found that all requirements for recovery under the warranty were met: there was a final judgment evicting Torrejon, Torrejon lost the land, and the right that led to eviction predated the sale. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of Tiana, ordering Torrejon to repay the sale price plus monthly payments from the date of eviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    EVICTION EXAMPLEs

    Uploaded by

    Yeshua Tura
    70 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a court case regarding a warranty of title. The plaintiff, Tiana, had sold land to the defendant, Torrejon, who was then evicted from the land due to a prior right. Tiana sued Torrejon to recover the sale price based on the warranty of title. The court found that all requirements for recovery under the warranty were met: there was a final judgment evicting Torrejon, Torrejon lost the land, and the right that led to eviction predated the sale. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of Tiana, ordering Torrejon to repay the sale price plus monthly payments from the date of eviction.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case regarding a warranty of title. The plaintiff, Tiana, had sold land to the defendant, Torrejon, who was then evicted from the land due to a prior right. Tiana sued Torrejon to recover the sale price based on the warranty of title. The court found that all requirements for recovery under the warranty were met: there was a final judgment evicting Torrejon, Torrejon lost the land, and the right that led to eviction predated the sale. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of Tiana, ordering Torrejon to repay the sale price plus monthly payments from the date of eviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    70 views2 pages

    EVICTION EXAMPLEs

    Uploaded by

    Yeshua Tura
    This document summarizes a court case regarding a warranty of title. The plaintiff, Tiana, had sold land to the defendant, Torrejon, who was then evicted from the land due to a prior right. Tiana sued Torrejon to recover the sale price based on the warranty of title. The court found that all requirements for recovery under the warranty were met: there was a final judgment evicting Torrejon, Torrejon lost the land, and the right that led to eviction predated the sale. Therefore, the court ruled in favor of Tiana, ordering Torrejon to repay the sale price plus monthly payments from the date of eviction.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    EXAMPLES:

    (1) S sells a parcel of land to B. Subsequently, C files an action for the recovery of possession,
    claiming that he is the owner of the land. At the instance of B, S was summoned to defend his title. The
    court renders final judgment, declaring that C has a better right. Accordingly, B is evicted.

    In this case, S is liable to B for failure to comply with his warranty against eviction. Here, the
    judgment is based on a right of a third person prior to the sale.

    (2) In the same example, suppose S was really the owner of the parcel of land. However, B did
    not have the sale registered. Immediately, S sold the same land to C who, in good faith, registered the
    sale.

    Here, the right upon which C based his claim is posterior to the sale. Nevertheless, B can sue S
    for damages because of the breach of warranty against eviction, the act giving rise to C’s right being
    imputable to the vendor.

    ART. 1549 TIANA vs. TORREJON

    Finally, it appears that the land, buildings and improvements described and specified in case No.
    1440 of the Court of Land Registration, are the same land, building and improvements involved in
    the present suit, described and specified in Exhibit B of the plaintiff, page 115 of the record, and
    paragraph 3 of the complaint.

    This is an action upon the warranty of the title to the property in case of eviction, under article 1475
    of the Civil Code. In such case there are three indispensable requisites: (1) Final judgment; (2) that
    the vendee be deprived of the whole or a part o the thing sold; and, (3) a right prior to the sale
    (Manresa on the Civil Code, volume 10, pages 161 to 170); and, finally, another indispensable
    requisite is that prescribed in article 1481 of the Civil Code: that the vendor be given notice of the
    suit at the instance of the vendee. On the merit of the present case, and the preponderance of the
    plaintiff's evidence, and from the facts established, all the foregoing requisites appear herein. In his
    brief the defendant alleges that the decree issued in case No. 1440 was not final and that the plaintiff
    could and should have appealed from it. Such a case is expressly decided by the illustrious and
    learned author, Manresa, in his commentaries on the Civil Code, volume 10, page 163, in the
    following manner:

    "Can the vendor escape his obligation of warranty by alleging that although there may be
    final judgment against the vendee, such judgment became final with the latter's consent? We
    understand not, and that the vendee's right does not suffer the least impairment because he
    did not appeal."

    With reference to the allegation of the defendant, Torrejon, that he was not notified of the suit, that
    is, of the objection presented by the government in case No. 1440, he can not set up such a
    defense, for he was himself the application in that case, without the intervention of Tiana, and such
    objection on the part of the government to his claims already subsisted. itc_alf
    By virtue of the foregoing considerations, and of the facts established in this cause, the court holds
    that the plaintiff, Don Leopoldo Cañizares Tiana, is entitled to recover from the defendant, Don Jose
    Maria Torrejon, the sum of P2,500, the price of the real estate involved in the present suit, and that
    he is also entitled to receive the sum of P36 a month from May, 1098, up to the day on which this
    judgment is executed. With reference to the counterclaim of the defendant, the court is of the opinion
    that he has no right to recover anything from the plaintiff.

    The court sentences the defendant, Jose Maria Torrejon, to restore to Don Leopoldo Cañizares
    Tiana, the sum of P2,500, the value of the lot, buildings and improvements involved in the present
    suit, described and specified in this decision, and to pay to said Tiana P36 a month from May, 1908,
    up to the day on which this judgment is executed; and further sentences the defendant to pay the
    cost of this judgment.

    You might also like