This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2014-04-23 |
LEONEN, J. |
||||
| In this case, Roldan sought to enforce a personal obligation on Vivencio to vacate his property, restore to him the possession of his property, and pay damages for the unauthorized use of his property.[92] Thus, Roldan's action for recovery of possession is an action in personam. As this court explained in Ang Lam v. Rosillosa and Santiago,[93] an action to recover the title to or possession of a parcel of land "is an action in personam, for it binds a particular individual only although it concerns the right to a tangible thing."[94] Also, in Muñoz v. Yabut, Jr.,[95] this court said that "a judgment directing a party to deliver possession of a property to another is in personam. It is binding only against the parties and their successors-in-interest by title subsequent to the commencement of the action."[96] | |||||
|
2013-06-05 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| The principle that a person cannot be prejudiced by a ruling rendered in an action or proceeding in which he was not made a party conforms to the constitutional guarantee of due process of law.[34] In Muñoz v. Yabut, Jr.,[35] this Court ruled:An action for declaration of nullity of title and recovery of ownership of real property, or re-conveyance, is a real action but it is an action in personam, for it binds a particular individual only although it concerns the right to a tangible thing. Any judgment therein is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded. | |||||
|
2012-12-10 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Reconveyance is proper under the circumstances. Reconveyance is available not only to the legal owner of a property but also to the person with a better right than the person under whose name said property was erroneously registered.[13] Although Asotigue is not the titled owner of the disputed lot, he apparently has a better right than Pacete, the latter not being in good faith when he obtained his title to the said property. In Munoz v. Yabut, Jr.,[14] the Court had the occasion to describe an action for reconveyance as follows: An action for reconveyance is an action in personam available to a person whose property has been wrongfully registered under the Torrens system in another's name. Although the decree is recognized as incontrovertible and no longer open to review, the registered owner is not necessarily held free from liens. As a remedy, an action for reconveyance is filed as an ordinary action in the ordinary courts of justice and not with the land registration court. Reconveyance is always available as long as the property has not passed to an innocent third person for value. A notice of lis pendens may thus be annotated on the certificate of title immediately upon the institution of the action in court. The notice of lis pendens will avoid transfer to an innocent third person for value and preserve the claim of the real owner.[15] (Emphasis supplied) | |||||
|
2012-09-24 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| The principle that a person cannot be prejudiced by a ruling rendered in an action or proceeding in which he has not been made a party conforms to the constitutional guarantee of due process of law. The operation of this principle was illustrated in Muñoz v. Yabut, Jr.,[16] where the Court declared that a person not impleaded and given the opportunity to take part in the proceedings was not bound by the decision declaring as null and void the title from which his title to the property had been derived. We said there that the effect of a judgment could not be extended to non-parties by simply issuing an alias writ of execution against them, for no man should be prejudiced by any proceeding to which he was a stranger. In the same manner, a writ of execution could be issued only against a party, not against a person who did not have his day in court.[17] | |||||