Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Supreme Court: Emilio Gaudier, For Appellant. Alfredo Chicote, For Appellee

    Uploaded by

    Elenamarie Ferrer
    20 views1 page
    This document is a Supreme Court ruling from September 12, 1901 regarding a case between Gaudencio Eleizegui and Josefa Arevalo. The court ruled that Eleizegui could not rely on Article 395 of the Mortgage Law to register ownership of a property, as that article only applies to cases without written title and Eleizegui did hold written title. Additionally, Eleizegui could not invoke Article 437 of the General Regulations, as that only applies to registration of possession, not ownership. Therefore, the court reversed the previous judgment in the case.

    Original Description:

    GR18

    Original Title

    GR18

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is a Supreme Court ruling from September 12, 1901 regarding a case between Gaudencio Eleizegui and Josefa Arevalo. The court ruled that Eleizegui could not rely on Article 395 of the Mortgage Law to register ownership of a property, as that article only applies to cases without written title and Eleizegui did hold written title. Additionally, Eleizegui could not invoke Article 437 of the General Regulations, as that only applies to registration of possession, not ownership. Therefore, the court reversed the previous judgment in the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    20 views1 page

    Supreme Court: Emilio Gaudier, For Appellant. Alfredo Chicote, For Appellee

    Uploaded by

    Elenamarie Ferrer
    This document is a Supreme Court ruling from September 12, 1901 regarding a case between Gaudencio Eleizegui and Josefa Arevalo. The court ruled that Eleizegui could not rely on Article 395 of the Mortgage Law to register ownership of a property, as that article only applies to cases without written title and Eleizegui did hold written title. Additionally, Eleizegui could not invoke Article 437 of the General Regulations, as that only applies to registration of possession, not ownership. Therefore, the court reversed the previous judgment in the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Republic of the Philippines

    SUPREME COURT
    Manila
    EN BANC
    G.R. No. 18

    September 12, 1901

    GAUDENCIO ELEIZEGUI, plaintiff-appellee,


    vs.
    JOSEFA AREVALO, defendant-appellant.
    Emilio Gaudier, for appellant.
    Alfredo Chicote, for appellee.
    WILLARD, J.:
    This case was initiated and carried on in reliance on the provisions of article 395 of the Mortgage
    Law. The article referred to applies only to cases in which the proprietor does not have a written title
    of ownership. The applicant holds a written title to the property described in his petition. Therefore he
    can not invoke the article referred to for the purpose of registering his ownership.
    Article 437 of the General Regulations (Reglamento General) can not be invoked by the petitioner,
    since said article applies only to the registration of possession. It appears in the present case,
    moreover, that the written document evidencing the title of the petitioner was submitted to the court
    below attached to the petition.
    The judgment appealed from should therefore be reversed. It is so ordered.

    You might also like