Tacas v. Tobon [When Possession in Good Faith Ceases, Fruits] - Lora

Tacas v. Tobon G.R. No. L-30240, August 23, 1929

FACTS: On February 1, 1918 Tacas, et. al. filed an action to recover from defendant Tobon the ownership and possession of three parcels of land, together with the fruits collected by him during the time he was in possession of said land since January 1912. He alleged that Tobon unlawfully took said parcels upon the death of Francisco Dumadag, predecessor in interest of the plaintiffs; and that he remained in possession, enjoying the fruits to the value of P700 annually. In his answer docketed on April 11, 1918, Tobon alleged that he is the owner of said lands, having purchased them from Exequiel or Gil Tacas. The trial court declared the plaintiffs to be the absolute owners of the three parcels of land in litigation, and ordered Tobon to deliver said parcels of land to them, together with the fruits collected each year since 1912 until the complete termination of the case, and in default thereof, to pay them P11,040, which is the total value of the rice and tobacco from 1912 to 1927. Tobon appealed.

ISSUE: WON the trial court erred in ordering Tobon to deliver to the plaintiffs the fruits of the land from 1912 to 1927?

RULING: Yes, the trial court erred insofar that it ordered Tobon to deliver to the plaintiffs the fruits of the land from 1912 to 1927. Evidence being lacking to show that when he entered upon the possession of the lands in question, he was aware of any flaw in his title or mode of acquiring it, he is deemed a possessor in good faith (Art. 433, Civil Code), and in accordance with Art. 451 of the Civil Code, the fruits of said lands were his, until he was summoned upon the complaint, or until he has filed his answer thereto. Manresa commented that to every possessor in good faith, there comes a time when he is considered a possessor in bad faith. When the owner or possessor with a better right comes along, where he becomes aware that what he had taken for granted is at least doubtful, and when he learns the grounds in support of the adverse contention, good faith ceases. The possessor becomes aware that his possession is unlawful from the time he learns of the complaint, from the time he is

summoned to the trial. It is at this time that his possession is interrupted, according to Art. 1945, and that he ceases to receive the fruits, according to the first paragraph of Art. 451. Thus, Tobas is only bound to return to the plaintiffs the fruits received from April 1918 to 1927 with the right to deduct the expenses of planting and harvesting (Art. 365 of the Civil Code), which shall be determined by the trial court, after hearing both parties.

N.B.: The Court upheld the trial court’s decision of declaring the plaintiffs to be the absolute owners of the three parcels of land in litigation and ordering Tobon to deliver the said parcels to them.