Rosario v. Alba

Summary

This ejectment case involved petitioners occupying properties inherited by respondent from his mother Luz Florendo-Alba. The Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and dismissed the ejectment complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The Court held that the complaint failed to establish either forcible entry or unlawful detainer under Rule 70 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. For forcible entry, there was no showing the action was filed within one year from the alleged dispossession, and no specific date of entry was alleged. For unlawful detainer, the respondent failed to demonstrate how the petitioners' initial possession was lawful through contract or tolerance. The respondent's mere allegation that petitioners entered 'without knowledge and consent' was insufficient to establish the tolerance required for unlawful detainer. The case emphasizes the strict jurisdictional requirements for ejectment cases and the necessity of proper pleading to establish the court's jurisdiction over such matters.