Case Digest: Heirs of Rosendo Lasam vs. Umengan, G.R. No. 168156, December 6, 2006

 Succession | Jurisdiction

Ponente:
Callejo, J.

Recit Version:
The subject lot was inherited by the heirs from Isabel Cuntapay. The heirs of Rosendo Lasam claimed ownership based on a last will and testament allegedly bequeathing the property to Rosendo Lasam. However, the CA found that the will had not been probated and, therefore, could not be a basis for their claim. In contrast, Vicenta Umengan provided deeds of conveyance showing her legal possession of portions of the lot. The CA ruled in her favor, emphasizing that its decision pertained only to physical possession, not ownership, and did not preclude the parties from filing appropriate actions to contest ownership.

The Supreme Court affirmed the CA's decision, stating that the last will and testament had no legal effect without being probated. As a result, the CA's provisional ruling on possession was justified, and Vicenta Umengan's deeds of conveyance substantiated her right to physical possession. The Court emphasized that the decision did not settle the issue of ownership conclusively, allowing the parties to pursue appropriate legal actions to contest ownership.


Facts:
The subject lot is owned by Isabel Cuntapay.

During her first marraige with Domingo Turingan, Isabel Cuntapay had four children: Abdon, Sado (deceased), Rufo and Maria. 

When Domingo Turingan passed away, Isabel Cuntapay remarried Mariano Lasam and had another two other children: Trinidad and Rosendo.

The heirs of Rosendo Lasam filed a complaint for unlawful detainer before MTCC against Vicenta Umengan, who was then occupying the subject lot. Vicenta Umengan is the daughter of Abdon Turingan.

In their complaint, the heirs of Rosendo Lasam alleged that they are the owners of the subject lot, having inherited it from their father. Rosendo Lasam was allegedly the sole heir of the deceased Pedro Cuntapay through Isabel Cuntapay. During his lifetime, Rosendo Lasam allegedly temporarily allowed Vicenta Umengan to occupy the subject lot sometime in 1955. The latter and her husband allegedly promised that they would vacate the subject lot upon demand. However, despite written notice and demand by the heirs of Rosendo Lasam, Vicenta Umengan allegedly unlawfully refused to vacate the subject lot and continued to possess the same. Accordingly, the heirs of Rosendo Lasam were constrained to institute the action for ejectment.

In her Answer with Counterclaim, Vicenta Umengan specifically denied the material..................

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Equality and Human Rights: The United Nations and Human Rights System (September 16, 2023)

Commercial Laws 1: R.A. No. 11057 — Personal Property Security Act

Land Title and Deeds: Chapter 1 — What Lands are Capable of Being Registered