[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
104 views1 page

Jurisdiction in Real Estate Dispute

The case involved a dispute over a real estate mortgage on a property with an assessed value of 13,380 pesos. The borrowers (Sps. Barrios) mortgaged the property to Alona Roldan but it was also mortgaged to another individual. When the borrowers defaulted, Roldan filed a foreclosure case in the RTC but it was dismissed because the assessed value determined jurisdiction was with the lower court. The RTC ruled it did not have jurisdiction as the assessed value was below 20,000 pesos. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld this, stating jurisdiction in a real estate foreclosure is based on the assessed property value. An exception to dismissing a case for bypassing lower

Uploaded by

Raiza Sunggay
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
104 views1 page

Jurisdiction in Real Estate Dispute

The case involved a dispute over a real estate mortgage on a property with an assessed value of 13,380 pesos. The borrowers (Sps. Barrios) mortgaged the property to Alona Roldan but it was also mortgaged to another individual. When the borrowers defaulted, Roldan filed a foreclosure case in the RTC but it was dismissed because the assessed value determined jurisdiction was with the lower court. The RTC ruled it did not have jurisdiction as the assessed value was below 20,000 pesos. On appeal, the Supreme Court upheld this, stating jurisdiction in a real estate foreclosure is based on the assessed property value. An exception to dismissing a case for bypassing lower

Uploaded by

Raiza Sunggay
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/ 1

ALONA ROLDAN VS SPS.

BARRIOS
Facts: Defendants Sps. Barrios borrowed from the plaintiff Alona Roldan the sum of
Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos executed a Deed of Real Estate Mortgage in favor
of the spouses upon a parcel of land situated in Aklan with an assessed value of
P13,380.00. Later, Barrios found out that the same lot was also mortgaged to a certain
Rommel D. Matorres. When the Spouses defaulted in payment, Barrios filed an action
for foreclosure of real estate mortgage against respondents’ spouse and respondent
Romel D. Matorres at RTC, Kalibo, Aklan but it was dismissed because the assessed
value of the property mortgaged is only P13,380.00 and the being a real action, the
assessed value of the property determines the jurisdiction. The assessed value of the
property involved being below P20,000.00, it is the first level court that has jurisdiction
over the cases. Petitioner in her Motion argued that foreclosure of real estate mortgage
is an action incapable of pecuniary estimation and jurisdiction lies with the Regional
Trial Court.
Issues: Whether or not the case is within the jurisdiction of the RTC.
Ruling: No. Jurisdiction over the subject matter is conferred by law and an objection
based on this ground cannot be waived by the parties. Batas Pambansa Blg. (BP) 129
as amended by Republic Act No. (RA) 7691 pertinently provides for the jurisdiction of
the RTC and the first level courts. It provides that the RTC exercises exclusive original
jurisdiction in civil actions where the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation. It also has jurisdiction in civil cases involving title to, or possession of, real
property or any interest in it where the assessed value of the property involved exceeds
P20,000.00, and if it is below P20,000.00, it is the first level court that has jurisdiction.
An action "involving title to real property" means that the plaintiff’s cause of action is
based on a claim that he owns such property or that he has the legal right to have
exclusive control, possession, enjoyment, or disposition of the same. As foreclosure of a
mortgage is real action, it is the assessed value of the property that determines the
court's jurisdiction. Considering that the assessed value of the mortgaged property is
only P13,380.00, the RTC correctly found that the action falls within the jurisdiction of
the first level court.
In terms of pecuniary estimation, the law states that where the basic issue is something
other than the right to recover a sum of money, where the money claim is purely
incidental to, or a consequence of, the principal relief sought, this Court has considered
such actions as cases where the subject of the litigation may not be estimated in terms
of money, and are cognizable exclusively by courts of the first instance.
ISSUE: Whether or not the case be dismissed for not following the doctrine of hierarchy
of courts.
RULING: YES. The judicial hierarchy of courts is not an iron-clad rule. A strict
application of the rule of the hierarchy of courts is not necessary when the cases
brought before the appellate courts do not involve factual but legal questions. Since the
petitioner raises a pure question of law pertaining to the court's jurisdiction on the
complaint about judicial foreclosure of sale, the Supreme Court would allow the
petitioner's direct resort to it.

You might also like