LEX SCEPTICUS

Berba vs Pablo G.R. No. 160032                    November 11, 2005 Facts: Estela L. Berba, a resident of Malate, Manila, was the owner of a parcel of land located at Sta. Ana, Manila covered by TCT No. 63726. A house was constructed on the lot, which she leased to Josephine Pablo and the Heirs of Carlos Palanca sometime in 1976. The lease was covered by a lease contract. Upon its expiration, the lessees continued leasing the house on a month-to-month basis. The lessees failed to pay the rentals due, and by May 1999, their arrears amounted to P81,818.00.  Berba then filed a complaint for eviction and collection of unpaid rentals only against Pablo in the Office of thePunong Barangay.  On June 5, 1999, Berba and Pablo executed an Agreement approved by the pangkat, as follows:             “Ako si Josephine Pablo, naninirahan sa 2338 M. Roxas St., Sta. Ana, Manila, na nasasakop ng Barangay 873, Zone 96, ay nangangako kay GG Robert Berba na nagmamay-ari ng aking tinitiraha

Martinez vs. Martinez GR No. 162084                                                  June 28, 2005 The spouses Daniel P. Martinez, Sr. and Natividad de Guzman-Martinez were the owners of a parcel of land by TCT No. 54334, as well as the house constructed thereon. On March 6, 1993, Daniel, Sr. executed a Last Will and Testament directing the subdivision of the property into three lots, namely, Lots 18-B-2-A, 18-B-2-B and 18-B-2-C. He then handed down the three lots to each of his sons, namely, Rodolfo, Manolo and Daniel, Jr.; Manolo was designated as the administrator of the estate. After the death of the spouses, Rodolfo found a deed of sale purportedly signed by his father on September 15, 1996, where the latter appears to have sold Lot 18-B-2 to Manolo and his wife Lucila.6He also discovered that TCT No. 237936 was issued to the vendees based on the said deed of sale. Rodolfo filed a complaint for annulment of deed of sale and cancellation of TCT No. 237936 against his bro

Valencides Vercide vs Judge Priscilla Hernandez AM No. MTJ-00-1265                                             April 6, 2000 Judge Hernandez was charges for grave abuse of authority and ignorance of the law for her dismissal of a case which complainant Vericde filed against Galleros for recovery of possession of land. The land is located in Upper Centro, Tudela, Misamis Occidental. Defendant Galleros is a resident of the same municipality while complainant are residents of Dipolog City. Because of this fact, the case was filed in court without prior referral to the Lupong Tagapamayapa.  Issue: 1. Whether or not the lupon has jurisdiction in this case? 2. Whether or not Judge Hernandez is guilty of grave abuse of authority and ignorance of the law? Ruling: 1. No, under Sec. 408 of RA 7160: “The lupon shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement…”  and Sec. 408 (f) and Sec. 2, Rul

Atty. Veustiano Tavora vs. Rosario Veloso GR No. L-60367                                   September 30, 1982 Venustriano Tavora, a resident of Marikina owns an apartment in Quiapo, which he leased to Julieta Capati, a resident of Quiapo. On account of an alleged violation of the lease contract, Tavora filed an ejectment suit in manila. Capati filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction for failure to bring the dispute first to the barangay for possible amicable settlement under PD 1508. Judge Veloso dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Issue: Whether or not the lupon has jurisdiction over the case? Ruling: No, Section 2 of PD 1508 specifies the condition under which the Lupon of a barangay “shall have authority” to bring together the disputants for amicable settlement of their dispute. The parties must be “actually residing in the same city or municipality.” At the same time Sec. 3 of PD 1508 – while reiterating that the disputants mus