AGUEDA DE VERA.docx

AGUEDADEVERA, MARIODELACRUZ, EVANGELINEDELACRUZ, andEDRONELDELACRUZ, petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, and RICARDO RAMOS, respondents.D E C I S I O NPURISIMA, J.:At bar is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court, seeking toreverseand set asidetheDecision[1] of theCourt of Aeals[!] inCA"#$R$ C%&o$ !15'(affir)ingwith)odificationtheDecision[*] datedAugust !, 1+,,of theRegional -rial Court, .ranch1+,[4] Caua/an,0sabela, in Civil Case &o$ .r$ 00"1,11$2ro) the records on hand, it aears that34n5anuar/ 14, 1+,*, rivateresondent RicardoRa)os fileda Complaint[5] against thehereinetitioners for recover/ of roert/ with da)ages, docketed as Civil Case &o$ .r 00"1,11 before the saidcourt of origin. 4n 5une !+, 1+,*, an A)ended Co)laint[1] was resented the ertinent ortion of whichalleged36662. That the plaintiff is the legal and absolute owner of a certain parcel of land known as Lot 2, H-4-6!, and particularl" described as follows#$ounded on the %&., b" 'oad( on the )*, b" +ro,incial 'oad( and on the *., b" %ational 'oad. containingan area of -,6!. s/uare meters, more or less.his title thereto being e,idenced b" 0riginal Certificate of Title %o. +-162 of the 'egister of 3eeds of 4sabela(-. That the defendants are occup"ing a triangular portion of the abo,e-described propert" containing an area of 22 s/uare meters, more or less, and which is bounded as follows#0n the %&., b" the 'oad( on the )&., b" Lot -54-$ of the subdi,ision plan, +sd 2-.2-.-2.!wherein the" ha,e constructed a house of strong and permanent materials this "ear 25- after remo,ing their pre,ious building of light materials in 6anuar" or 7ebruar" of 2!.(4$ -hat the laintiff has de)anded that the defendants re)ove their i)rove)ent thereon and vacate the said portion, $$$ but the defendants ha,e refused and failed, without an" 8ust or lawful cause to do so, to the present time( 9990ntheir :nswer,[(] the hereinetitionerstheori7ed, interalia,thatthe/ havebeeninossession notonl/ of !! s8uare )eters but (' s8uare )eters of land through their redecessor"in"interest, -eodoro de laCru7 ;husband of defendant-appellant :gueda 3e arch!1, 1++1, theCourt of Aeals decidedthecase, )odif/ingtheDecisionbelowanddisosing thus3C0%70'>:$L@ T0 TH& 70'&B04%B, the 8udgment appealed from is hereb" MODIFIED, dismissing plaintiff-appellees complaint as regards +ortion :, conse/uentl" deleting the monthl" rents decreed b" the lower court in fa,or of plaintiff-appellee as regards said portion, and is :774'>&3 in all other respects.%o pronouncement as to costs.)0 0'3&'&3.?ndaunted, etitioners have co)e to this Court via the resent etition9 contending that3-@A DAC0ARC@ 1++1 BA&&AC AD RA&DARAD E0-@ #RA%A A.?