The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over a principal action for annulment of mortgage

since it is an ordinary civil action in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary
estimation. The Court ruled in the case of Far East Bank and Trust Company v. Shemberg
Marketing Corporation, that an action for cancellation of mortgage has a subject that is
incapable of pecuniary estimation since the primary objective is not to recover a sum of money
but to question the validity of the mortgage contract. The Court has a chance to reiterate this in
the case of Russell v. Vestil, where it held that an action questioning the validity of a mortgage is
one incapable of pecuniary estimation.

In our jurisdiction, there are three kinds of action for recovery of possession of real property:

1) ejectment, either for unlawful detainer or forcible entry, in case the dispossession has lasted
for not more than a year;

2) accion publiciona or a plenary action for recovery of real right of possession when
dispossession has lasted for more than one year; and

3) accion reinvindicatoria or an action for recovery of ownership.

The following are comparisons of annulment of mortgage and the kinds of recovery of
possession:

As to jurisdiction:

The Regional Trial Court has jurisdiction over action for annulment of mortgage since the
subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimation. The proper Metropolitan Trial
Court (Me TC), MTC, or Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) has exclusive original
jurisdiction over ejectment cases. Moreover, jurisdiction over accion publiciana and accion
reinvidicatoria cases is determined by the assessed value of the property; proper MeTC, MTC, or
MCTC if the assessed value does not exceed P20,000.00 or P50,000 in Metro Manila, and RTC
if the assessed value exceeds those amounts.

Allegation in the complaint of the assessed value of the property is required in accion publiciana
and accion reinvidicatoria cases while no such allegation is required in action for annulment of
mortgage and ejectment cases.

As to issues involve:

The issue in the action for annulment of mortgage is the validity of the mortgage. In an ejectment
and accion publiciona cases, the primary issue is the possession of the property while in accion
reinvindicatoria the question is the recovery of ownership of the property.
As to nature of the proceedings:

The action for annulment of mortgage is adversarial in nature and require full-blown trial while
ejectment and accion publiciana proceedings are summary in nature.

As to allegations:

In action for annulment of mortgage, the plaintiff alleges circumstances that would invalidate the
mortgage. In an accion reivindicatoria the plaintiff alleges ownership over a parcel of land and
seeks recovery of its full possession. While in ejectment and accion publiciana, the plaintiff
merely alleges proof of a better right to possess without claim of title.