Sps. LYDIA FLORES-CRUZ and REYNALDO I. CRUZ vs. Sps. LEONARDO and ILUMINADA GOLI-CRUZ, et al.

G.R. No. 172217;  September 18, 2009

Topic: Jurisdiction of the MTC over ejectment cases

FACTS:

• Sometime in 1999, Petitioner Spouses purchased a parcel of land from a relative. The property was situated in Pulong Yantok, Angat, Bulacan. They paid real estate taxes but never occupied the property. Petitioners sold portions to third parties.
• Petitioners discovered sometime in 2000 that Respondents were occupying a section of the land. Petitioners offered to sell the land to them. Since they could not agree on the price, Petitioners demanded that Respondents vacate the land.
• Petitioners filed a case for recovery of possession of the land in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos, Bulacan in 2001.
• Respondents filed a motion to dismiss claiming, that the RTC had no jurisdiction over the case as it should have been filed in the MTC since it was a summary action for ejectment under Rule 70 of the Rules of Court.
• RTC denied the motion to dismiss and eventually decided in favor of Petitioners.
• On appeal, the CA ruled in favor of Respondents and dismissed the complaint. It held that the RTC had no jurisdiction over the action for recovery of possession because petitioners had been dispossessed of the property for less than a year. It held that the complaint was one for unlawful detainer which should have been filed in the MTC.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the RTC has jurisdiction over the case.

HELD:

No; RTC did not have jurisdiction over the case. It is axiomatic that jurisdiction is determined solely by the allegations in the complaint and not by evidence adduced during trial. One cannot advert to anything not set forth in the complaint. In this case, the complaint alleged that the Petitioners tolerated the occupation of the Respondents and filed the case with the RTC in less than 1 year from the demand to vacate.

When the case was filed in 2001, Congress had already approved Republic Act No. 7691 which expanded the MTC’s jurisdiction to include other actions involving title to or possession of real property (accion publiciana and reinvindicatoria) where the assessed value of the property does not exceed P20,000 (or P50,000, for actions filed in Metro Manila). The complaint did not contain any allegations as to the value of the property. Thus, the Court could not determine where jurisdiction lies.

Wherefore, petition is denied.