G.R. No.
L-175 April 30, 1946
DAMIAN IGNACIO, FRANCISCO IGNACIO and LUIS IGNACIO, petitioners,
vs.
ELIAS HILARIO and his wife DIONISIA DRES, and FELIPE NATIVIDAD, Judge of First Instance of Pangasinan,
respondents.
FACTS OF THE CASE:
This is a petition for certiorari arising from a case in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan between the
herein respondents Elias Hilario and his wife Dionisia Dres as plaintiffs, and the herein petitioners Damian,
Francisco and Luis, surnamed Ignacio, as defendants, concerning the ownership of a parcel of land, partly rice-
land and partly residential. After the trial of the case, the lower court, presided over by Hon. Alfonso Felix,
rendered judgment holding plaintiffs as the legal owners of the whole property but conceding to defendants the
ownership of the houses and granaries built by them on the residential portion with the rights of a possessor in
good faith, in accordance with article 361 of the Civil Code. The dispositive part of the decision, hub of this
controversy, follows:
Wherefore, judgment is hereby rendered declaring:
(1) That the plaintiffs are the owners of the whole property described in transfer certificate of title No.
12872 (Exhibit A) issued in their name, and entitled to the possession of the same;
(2) (2) That the defendants are entitled to hold the position of the residential lot until after they are paid the
actual market value of their houses and granaries erected thereon, unless the plaintiffs prefer to sell
them said residential lot, in which case defendants shall pay the plaintiffs the proportionate value of
said residential lot taking as a basis the price paid for the whole land according to Exhibit B; and
(3) (3) That upon defendant's failure to purchase the residential lot in question, said defendants shall
remove their houses and granaries after this decision becomes final and within the period of sixty (60)
days from the date that the court is informed in writing of the attitude of the parties in this respect.
The owner of the building erected in good faith on a land owned by another, is entitled to retain the
possession of the land until he is paid the value of his building, under article 453. The owner of the land, upon the
other hand, has the option, under article 361, either to pay for the building or to sell his land to the owner of the
building. But he cannot, as respondents here did, refuse both to pay for the building and to sell the land and
compel the owner of the building to remove it from the land where it is erected.
ISSUE OF THE CASE:
1. Is Art. 448 of the New Civil Code applicable if landowner refuses to make a choice?
COURT RULING:
The writ of execution issued by Judge Natividad is hereby set aside and the lower court ordered to hold a
hearing in the principal case wherein it must determine the prices of the buildings and of the residential lot where
they are erected, as well as the period of time within which the plaintiffs-respondents may exercise their option
either to pay for the buildings or to sell their land, and, in the last instance, the period of time within which the
defendants-petitioners may pay for the land, all these periods to be counted from the date the judgment becomes
executory or unappealable. After such hearing, the court shall render a final judgment according to the evidence
presented by the parties.
The costs shall be paid by plaintiffs-respondents.
