RUFINO MISA, ANASTACIO MISA AND ABUNDIA S. MISA, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ALBERTO MISA, PANFILA (TEOFILA) MISA and LUIS MISA.
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 97291
- Promulgated: 1992-08-05
- Ponente: Medialdea, J.
Doctrine
In an action to recover property, the plaintiff must identify the property sought and rely on the strength of his title, not on the weakness of the defendant's claim.
The plaintiff bears the burden of proving affirmative allegations of the complaint by a preponderance of evidence; failure to do so warrants dismissal.
Facts
Petition for review on certiorari seeking to nullify the Court of Appeals decision which affirmed the RTC's dismissal of petitioners' complaint.
Appellant Rufino Misa testified that only appellee Alberto claimed ownership of a portion of the parcel during the cadastral survey; Alberto claimed Lot No. 8403, but appellants did not show it was the same portion they claimed.
Trial evidence indicated the disputed 'tuba' store erected by Alberto on Crisostomo's parcel was gone for about fifteen years, according to appellants' witness.
The Court found appellants failed to identify the property and to prove affirmative allegations of ownership by a preponderance of evidence.
Issues
Whether appellants sufficiently proved ownership of the disputed parcel to recover possession.
Whether the RTC and CA erred in dismissing appellants' complaint against appellee Alberto Misa.
Ruling
The petition is DENIED; the Court AFFIRMED the Court of Appeals' decision and upheld the RTC's dismissal of petitioners' complaint.
Appellants failed to identify the property and failed to prove the affirmative allegations of ownership by preponderance of evidence; dismissal was not reversible error.
Keywords
G.R. No. 97291, petition for review on certiorari, CA-G.R. CV No. 18176, Regional Trial Court of Cebu, partition of unregistered land, Tax Declaration No. 09478, complaint for quieting of title, ejectment and damages, cadastral survey, counterclaim for attorney's fees and litigation expenses, Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, questions of law, findings of fact, Medina, et al. v. Asistio, etc., et al., G.R. No. 75450, grave abuse of discretion, misapprehension of facts, conflicting findings, conclusions without citation of specific evidence, parcel, arnaez