IGLESIA DE JESUCRISTO V.

DELA CRUZ (2018) LAU OARDE

SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE CORPO

Iglesia de Jesucristo Jerusalem Nueva de Manila v. Dela Cruz (2018)

SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE
Reconstituted title

G.R. No. | Date G.R. No. 208284 | April 23, 2018

Petitioner/s Iglesia de Jesucristo Jerusalem Nueva of Manila, Philippines, Inc.,
represented by its President, Francisco Galvez
Respondent/s Loida Dela Cruz using the name Church of Jesus Christ, "New Jerusalem" and
all persons claiming rights under her
Ponente Del Castillo, J.

C ASE S UMMARY

Petitioner Iglesia De Jesucristo Jerusalem Nueva of Manila, Philippines, Inc., represented by

Francisco Galvez, filed before MeTC-Malabon City a Complaint for unlawful detainer with
damages against respondent Loida Dela Cruz, using the name Church of Jesus Christ, "New
Jerusalem." Petitioner alleged that (1) it is the owner of two certain parcels of land, both covered
by OCT No. 35266 and the corresponding Tax Declaration No. 06223; (2) in 1998, without the
knowledge and consent of all the members and offers of petitioner, respondent Dela Cruz formed,
organized, and created the name of Church of Jesus Christ, "New Jerusalem”; (3) the organization
formed by Dela Cruz was used by her as an instrument in claiming that she is the representative
of the said religious organization and had the right over the subject lot; and (4) the occupation and
possession of Dela Cruz over the subject lot was merely tolerated.

Respondent Dela Cruz, meanwhile, allege that (1) as per inquiry on-line with the SEC, petitioner
does not exist as a corporation; and (2) Galvez deviously acquired a new title by declaring the
previous one as struck by flood. OCT No. 8257 (owner's copy) was never lost and is still in the
possession of the Obispo Representante at Pastor General ng Iglesia ni Jesu Kristo "Bagong
Jerusalem," Inc.

Which party is authorized to represent the registered owner of the disputed

property? Respondent DELA CRUZ.

The totality of evidence presented by the parties tilts in favor of Dela Cruz. First, Galvez failed to
explain a glaring inconsistency. Galvez's religious organization, 'Nueva de Manila,' of which he
represents was organized way back in 1940, was registered only in 1999. On the other hand,
'Bagong Jerusalem' which also bears the name of 'New Jerusalem' in its English translation and
'Jerusalem Nueva' in its Spanish translation was registered in 1955 as a corporation sole. 'Nueva
de Manila' appearing as the registered owner of the subject property and 'Bagong Jerusalem,' the
registered name of the religious organization of Dela Cruz which is also known as 'New Jerusalem'
in its English translation are one and the same organization.

Galvez succeeded in obtaining a new title to the disputed property based on the latter's untruthful
claim that the original thereof was destroyed by a flood, (even though the said original title, OCT
No. 8257, was never in fact lost) and was still in the possession of Obispo Representante at Pastor

106.241 1 OF 5
 IGLESIA DE JESUCRISTO V. DELA CRUZ (2018) LAU OARDE
SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE CORPO

General ng Iglesia ni JesuKristo "Bagong Jerusalem," Inc. Hence, the issuance of the reconstituted
title was irregular and improper because the alleged corporation which owned the disputed
property was not yet in existence when the alleged original title was issued. See Doctrine.

An ejectment case will not necessarily be decided in favor of one who has presented proof of
ownership of the subject property. Key jurisdictional facts constitutive of the particular ejectment
case filed must be averred in the complaint and sufficiently proven. ITC, petitioner failed to adduce
proof that he merely tolerated respondents' possession of the disputed property.

D OCTRINE

Issuance of reconstituted title. The issuance of a reconstituted title will be considered

irregular and improper if the alleged corporation which owned the disputed property is not yet in
existence when the alleged original title is issued.

R ULING

Petition denied. Respondent has a better right of possession over the disputed property.

R ELEVANT F ACTS
● Petitioner Iglesia De Jesucristo Jerusalem Nueva of Manila, Philippines, Inc., represented by
Francisco Galvez, filed before MeTC-Malabon City a Complaint for unlawful detainer with
damages against respondent Loida Dela Cruz, using the name Church of Jesus Christ, "New
Jerusalem" and all persons claiming rights under her. Petitioner allege the following.
o Petitioner alleged that it is a religious corporation with office address in Malabon City.
o Petitioner is the owner of certain parcels of land consisting of 204 square meters and
71 square meters, both covered by OCT No. 35266 and the corresponding Tax
Declaration No. 06223.
o Galvez is the nephew of Rosendo Gatchalian, the founder and the leader of petitioner
way back in 1940 who organized the said religious corporation and built a chapel
within the subject lot.
o Since 1940, Miguela Gatchalian, the late mother of Galvez and her family used to
occupy and possess and likewise built a house of their own in the concept of an owner.
o Dela Cruz used to be a member of the petitioner. However, when Rosendo died, the
members became disorganized. In 1998, without the knowledge and consent of all the
members and offers of petitioner, respondent Dela Cruz formed, organized, and
created the name of Church of Jesus Christ, "New Jerusalem."
o The organization formed by Dela Cruz was used by her as an instrument in claiming
that she is the representative of the said religious organization and had the right over
the subject lot.
o The occupation and possession of Dela Cruz over the subject lot was merely tolerated
because they were former members of petitioner.
o A demand was sent to respondents to vacate and surrender the peaceful possession of
the chapel but the respondents failed and refused to vacate the same. The demand
letter was personally served, but Dela Cruz refused to sign the same.

106.241 2 OF 5
 IGLESIA DE JESUCRISTO V. DELA CRUZ (2018) LAU OARDE
SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE CORPO

● Respondent Dela Cruz, meanwhile, allege the following:

o She is an Officer of Obispo Representante at Pastor General ng Iglesia ni Jesu Kristo
"Bagong Jerusalem," Inc. Her authority to represent said religious organization before
the MeTC is embodied in a board resolution.
o As per inquiry on-line with the SEC, petitioner does not exist as a corporation.
o Galvez deviously acquired a new title by declaring the previous one as struck by flood.
OCT No. 8257 (owner's copy) was never lost and is still in the possession of the Obispo
Representante at Pastor General ng Iglesia ni Jesu Kristo "Bagong Jerusalem," Inc.
o Galvez declared the improvement (house) in his name. However, the same document
on the dorsal portion thereof showed that the improvement was described as situated
“on the land of New Jerusalem, New Church of Jesus Christ.”
o In 1914, the church was founded and had its principal office at 797 Dagupan Ext., Solis,
Tondo, Manila. The bishop then was Rev. Ildefonso Agulo. The church was known
then, as it was now, as the following:
1. "Church of Jesus Christ New Jerusalem" (English)
2. "Iglesia ni Jesu-Kristo Bagong Jerusalem" (Tagalog)
3. "Iglesia De Jesucristo Jerusalem Nueva" (Spanish)
▪ These 3nomenclatures were registered at the Department of Instruction,
National Library, Manila.
o Miguela built a shanty upon tolerance by Pineda upon the prodding of one of its
members, Feliza Bravo.
o There was neither a demand that came to her attention nor was there an occasion that
she refused to sign the same.
o The reconstituted title granted to Galvez was irregular and invalid because the alleged
corporation represented by Galvez was not yet existing when the reconstituted title was
issued.
● MeTC: Dismissed petitioner’s complaint. Petitioner had failed to establish by preponderant
evidence that it had a better right of possession over the disputed property arising from its
claim of ownership.
o Petitioner was organized as a religious corporation only on June 15, 1999, and was
registered only on August 4, 1999, per its SEC Certificate of Incorporation. Petitioner
did not own any real property per the List of Properties that it submitted to the SEC.
o Dela Cruz had successfully proven that she was the authorized representative of the
Obispo Representante at Pastor General ng Iglesia ni Jesu Kristo "Bagong Jerusalem,"
Inc. The said corporation sole is the owner of the disputed property.
● RTC: Upheld the MeTC decision.
● CA: Affirmed the RTC decision. While Dela Cruz failed to present the duplicate original copy
of the title which was allegedly still in the possession of the Obispo Representante, the fact
nonetheless remained that the title in petitioner's possession was issued only after a petition
for the issuance of a new owner's duplicate copy was granted by the RTC.

106.241 3 OF 5
 IGLESIA DE JESUCRISTO V. DELA CRUZ (2018) LAU OARDE
SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE CORPO

o Notwithstanding petitioner's claim of a better right over the disputed property, Galvez
and the latter's sub-lessees had, in fact, vacated the same.

I SSUE / S , H ELD , AND R ATIO

Which party is authorized to represent the registered owner of the Respondent
disputed property? Dela Cruz

Evidence presented by respondent is more preponderant.

● A complaint sufficiently alleges a cause of action for unlawful detainer if it recites the
following: (1) the defendant's initial possession of the property was lawful, either by contract
with or by tolerance of the plaintiff; (2) eventually, such possession became illegal upon the
plaintiff's notice to the defendant of the termination of the latter's right of possession; (3)
thereafter, the defendant remained in possession and deprived the plaintiff of the enjoyment
of the property; and (4) the plaintiff instituted the complaint fo ejectment within 1 year from
the last demand to vacate the property.
o ITC, the lower courts ruled for respondents, by uniformly holding that Dela Cruz was
able to show by convincing evidence that she is the duly authorized representative of
the registered owner of the disputed property.
● The totality of evidence presented by the parties tilts in favor of Dela Cruz:
o Galvez failed to explain a glaring inconsistency:
▪ Galvez's religious organization, 'Nueva de Manila,' of which he represents was
organized way back in 1940, was registered only in 1999.
▪ On the other hand, 'Bagong Jerusalem' which also bears the name of 'New
Jerusalem' in its English translation and 'Jerusalem Nueva' in its Spanish
translation was registered in 1955 as a corporation sole with Rev. Pineda as the
Bishop Representative and General Pastor of the church and not Rosendo, the
founder as Galvez claimed.
o 'Nueva de Manila' appearing as the registered owner of the subject property and
'Bagong Jerusalem,' the registered name of the religious organization of Dela Cruz
which is also known as 'New Jerusalem' in its English translation are one and the same
organization.
o The pieces of evidence of Dela Cruz are found to be more preponderant, the same being
consistent and more credible.

Petitioner failed to prove that he merely tolerated respondents' possession of the

disputed property.
● The disputed property is registered in the name of "The Iglesia de Jesucristo, Jerusalem Nueva
of Manila, Philippines, Inc." as stated in both the reconstituted title attached to the Complaint
submitted by petitioner, as represented by Galvez, as well as in the copy of the original title
attached to the Position Paper filed by Dela Cruz.
● Galvez succeeded in obtaining a new title to the disputed property based on the latter's
untruthful claim that the original thereof was destroyed by a flood, (even though the said

106.241 4 OF 5
 IGLESIA DE JESUCRISTO V. DELA CRUZ (2018) LAU OARDE
SEC. 108 CORPORATION SOLE CORPO

original title, OCT No. 8257, was never in fact lost) and was still in the possession of Obispo
Representante at Pastor General ng Iglesia ni JesuKristo "Bagong Jerusalem," Inc.
o Hence, the issuance of the reconstituted title was irregular and improper because the
alleged corporation which owned the disputed property was not yet in existence when
the alleged original title was issued.
● Where the parties to an ejectment case raise the issue of ownership, the courts may pass upon
that issue to determine who between the parties has the better right to possess the property.
Any issue on ownership arising in forcible entry or unlawful detainer is resolved only
provisionally for the purpose of determining the principal issue of possession.
● An ejectment case will not necessarily be decided in favor of one who has presented proof of
ownership of the subject property. Key jurisdictional facts constitutive of the particular
ejectment case filed must be averred in the complaint and sufficiently proven.
o ITC, petitioner failed to adduce proof that he merely tolerated respondents' possession
of the disputed property.
● In Corpuz v. Spouses Agustin, the Supreme Court recognized that even as the registered owner
generally has the right of possession as an attribute of ownership, nevertheless the dismissal
of the complaint for unlawful detainer is justified where proof of preponderant evidence of
material possession of the disputed premises has not been convincingly adduced.
● The acts of tolerance must be proved, for bare allegation of tolerance did not suffice. At least,
the petitioner should show the overt acts indicative of its or its predecessor's tolerance.
o ITC, it did not adduce such evidence. Thus petitioner’s claims are baseless and
unsubstantiated.

R ULING
WHEREFORE, the instant Petition for Review is DENIED for lack of merit.

106.241 5 OF 5