Scribd
Upload
605 views2 pages

GR 228680 Sanchez V Aguilar

1) Spouses Sanchez filed a complaint for forcible entry against the heirs of Juanito Aguilar regarding a 600 sqm portion of land that the Spouses had purchased from Aguilar. 2) The MCTC issued a writ of execution but later discontinued it upon discovering issues with the survey. However, the sheriff adopted a plan showing the Spouses' land included a 20sqm public easement. 3) The Spouses received notice that 150sqm of their land along Lake Sebu belonged to the heirs instead. The Spouses filed to annul the RTC judgment but the CA reversed it.

Uploaded by

Rajkumari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
605 views2 pages

GR 228680 Sanchez V Aguilar

1) Spouses Sanchez filed a complaint for forcible entry against the heirs of Juanito Aguilar regarding a 600 sqm portion of land that the Spouses had purchased from Aguilar. 2) The MCTC issued a writ of execution but later discontinued it upon discovering issues with the survey. However, the sheriff adopted a plan showing the Spouses' land included a 20sqm public easement. 3) The Spouses received notice that 150sqm of their land along Lake Sebu belonged to the heirs instead. The Spouses filed to annul the RTC judgment but the CA reversed it.

Uploaded by

Rajkumari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

SPS. SANCHEZ VS.

AGUILAR
GR 228680 SEPT. 17, 2018

FACTS:
On July 11, 2000, Juanito Aguilar sold to petitioner Spouses Sanchez a 600
sqm. Portion of his lot located in the municipality of Lake Sebu, South Cotabato.
Four years later, the heirs of Aguilar, herein respondents fenced the boundary line
including such portion owned by spouses. The latter protested before the
barangay but no settlement was reached. As a result, they filed a complaint for
forcible entry claiming that they own the alleged alluvium deposits. The heirs on
the other hand asserted that the alluvium was beyond the 600 sqm.
A writ of execution was issued by the MCTC which was later on
discontinued upon discovering that the surveyor measured the National highway
at 60m wide which the respondent disagreed as she claims that the width was
only 30 meters. The sheriff adopted the plan prepared by the engineer which
shaved that the edge or boundary line of the 600sqm. Lot is a 20sqm. wide public
easement.
Nevertheless, the spouses received a notice informing them that the
150sqm. lot along Lake Sebu belong to the heirs. Spouses Sanchez filed a
complaint to annul the judgment granted by the RTC but reversed by the C.A.
Hence, this petition on the ground of lack of jurisdiction.

ISSUE:
Whether the MCTC is lack of jurisdiction?
RULING:
No. Jurisdiction is the power and authority of the tribunal to hear, try and
decide a case, the lack thereof refers to either lack of jurisdiction over the person
of the defending party or over the subject matter of the action. Lack or absence of
jurisdiction presupposes that the court should not have taken cognizance of the
complaint because the constitution does not vest it with jurisdiction over the
person of the respondent or defendant is acquired by voluntary appearance or
submission to the court, or by coercive process issued by the court to such party
through service of summons.
In this case, the MCTC had duly acquired jurisdiction over the person of the
petitioner spouses as they were the ones who filed the complaint for forcible
entry suit before the MCTC. Moreover, the law provides that MCTC has exclusive
original jurisdiction over ejectment cases which includes forcible entry.

You might also like