Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The trial courts order of dismissal was predicated on the theory that
the suit petitioners commenced was an "action upon an injury to
their rights" contemplated in Article 1146 of the Civil Code was
erroneous. Petitioners Q.C. covered by TCT No. 27946 of the
Registry of Deeds for Quezon City.
Sometime March of 1999, during one of the trips of plaintiff
Consorcia Ragasa to the Philippines from Italy, she was surprised to
learn from agasa to the Philippines erroneous.
Petitioners complaint reveals t dismissal was nstrument, record,
claim, encumbrance, or proceeding which is apparently valid or
effective but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable, or
ated at No. 06, Garnet St., Prater Village II, Diliman, Q.C. covered by
TCT No. 27946 of the Registry of Deeds for Quezon City.
Sometime March of 1999, during one of the trips of plaintiff
Consorcia Ragasa to the Philippines fr was sold by defendant Italy,
she was surprised to learn from the Registry of Deeds for Quezon
City that o uez quieting of title to real property under Article 476 of
the Civil Code which states:
Instead of filing an answer, private respondents moved for the
dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of prescription and laches.
Facts:
On May 10, 1989, 2000, the RTC granted the motion. Characterizing
the suit as an action "upon an injury to the rights of the plaintiff" wh
complaint reveals that the action was essentially one for quieting of
title to real property under Article 476 of the Civil Code which states:
Instead of filing an answer, private respondents moved for the
dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of prescription and laches.
Facts:
On May 10, 1989, Edesito and Consorcia Ragasa est bidder for the
price and consideration of P511,000.00.
Edesito and Consorcia Ragasa filed a complaint1 against
private respondents Gerardo and Rodriga Roa and the ex-officio
sheriff of Quezon City.
To make out an action to quiet title under the foregoing
provision, the initiatory pleading has onl Consorcia Ragasa entered
into a contract with Oakland Development Resources
Corpunenforceable." 8 Thus, the averments in petitioners complaint
that (1) they acquired ownership of a piece of land by tradition or
delivery as a consequence of sale and (2) private respondents
subsequently purchased the same piece velopment Resources
Corporation for the purchase in installments of a piece of property,
with improvements, located at No. 06, Garnet St., Prater Village II,
The
suit
The trial courts order of dismissal was predicated on the theory that
the suit petitioners commenced was an "action upon an injury to
their rights" contemplated in Article 1146 of the Civil Code was
erroneous. Petitioners complaint reveals that the action was
essentially one
To make out an action to quiet title under the foregoing
provision, the initiatory pleading has only to set forth allegations
showing that (1) the plaintiff has "title to real property or any
interest therein"7 and (2) the defendant claims an interest therein
adverse to the plaintiffs arising from an "instrument, record, claim,
encumbrance, or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective
but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable, or
Held:
trial courts order of dismissal was predicated on the theory that the
petitioners commenced was an "action upon an injury to their rights"