Quijano v. Amante

Summary

This case involved an ejectment dispute over inherited property where co-heir Eliseo sold portions to respondent lawyer Atty. Amante before partition. When the heirs later partitioned the estate, the disputed portions were adjudicated to petitioner Fe Quijano instead of Eliseo. The Supreme Court ruled that unlawful detainer was an improper remedy because petitioner failed to prove her alleged tolerance of respondent's occupation. Without such proof, possession was deemed illegal from the beginning, precluding unlawful detainer. The case could not be treated as forcible entry due to lack of allegations about unlawful means of entry. The Court established that a co-owner can only sell his pro indiviso share, making the buyer a co-owner entitled to participate in partition. The case demonstrates the importance of proving tolerance in unlawful detainer cases and the rights of assignees in co-ownership situations.