Catungal vs Hao
GR No. 134972, 22 March 2001
355 SCRA 29
FACTS
The
original owner Aniana Galang, leased a 3-storey building in Parañaque to BPI in
1972. During the lease period, BPI subleased the ground floor to Doris Hao. In
1984, Galang and Hao executed a lease contract on the 2nd and 3rd
floors of the building. 2 years later, spouses Catungal bought the property
from Galang. Upon expiration of the lease agreements, Catungal demanded Hao to
vacate the building. The demand was unheeded so petitioners filed for ejectment
before the MeTC, which ordered Hao to vacate the premises and pay P20,000 until
she finally vacates. Petitioners moved for clarificatory or amended judgment on
the ground that lthough MeTC ordered defendant to vacate, it only awarded rent or
compensation for the use of said property for the ground floor and not for the
entire subject property. the MeTC amended the judgment but petitioners moved
for reconsideration praing that respondent be ordered to pay P20,000 pm for the
use and occupancy of the ground floor and P10,000 pm for the 2nd and
3rd floors. The case was referred to RTC which affirmed the
decision. On appeal to the CA, the latter reduced the P20,000 to P8,000 and the
P10,000 each to P5,000 each.
ISSUE
Whether
or not the RTC decision should be reinstated
HELD
Yes.
The plaintiff in an ejectment case is entitled to damages caused by his loss of
the use and possession of the premises.
No comments:
Post a Comment