RSBRDC V FORMARAN

FACTS

• Ruby Shelter obtained a loan from Tan and Obiedo (P

95,700,620.00)
• Secured by 5 parcels of land.
• Memorandum of agreement
The Memorandum of Agreement required that Ruby
Shelter execute "by way of dacion en pago," Deeds of
Absolute Sale in favor of Tan and Obiedo, covering
the same parcels of land subject of the mortgages. 
 FACTS

• Without payment having been made by

petitioner on 31 December 2005, Tan and
Obiedo presented the Deeds of Absolute
Sale dated 3 January 2006 before the Register
of Deeds of Naga City on 8 March 2006, as a
result of which, they were able to secure
TCTs over the five parcels of land in their
names.
 • The Complaint was docketed
as Civil Case No. 2006-
0030.
ON 16 MARCH 2006, RUBY • Upon filing its Complaint
SHELTER FILED BEFORE with the RTC on 16 March
THE RTC A 2006, Ruby Shelter paid
COMPL AINT AGAINST TAN, the sum of ₱13,644.25 for
OBIEDO, AND ATTY.
REYES, FOR DECL ARATION docket and other legal
OF NULLITY OF DEEDS fees, as assessed by the
OF SALES Office of the Clerk of Court.
The Clerk of Court initially
considered Civil Case No.
2006-0030 as an action
incapable of pecuniary
estimation and computed
the docket and other legal
fees due thereon according
 Since Ruby Shelter did not
TAN CONTENDED THAT pay the appropriate docket
CIVIL CASE NO. 2006-
0030 INVOLVED REAL
fees for Civil Case No. 2006-
PROPERTIES, THE 0030, the RTC did not
DOCKET FEES FOR acquire jurisdiction over
WHICH SHOULD BE the said case. Hence, Tan
COMPUTED IN asked the RTC to issue an
ACCORDANCE WITH
SECTION 7(A), NOT order requiring Ruby Shelter
SECTION 7(B)(1), OF to pay the correct and
RULE 141 OF THE RULES accurate docket fees
OF COURT, AS AMENDED pursuant to Section 7(a), Rule
BY A.M. NO. 04-2-04-SC
WHICH TOOK EFFECT ON 141 of the Rules of Court, as
16 AUGUST 2004. amended
 SECTION 7, RULE 141

The docket fees under Section 7(a), Rule 141, in

cases involving real property depend on the fair
market value of the same: the higher the value of
the real property, the higher the docket fees due.
In contrast, Section 7(b)(1), Rule 141 imposes a
fixed or flat rate of docket fees on actions
incapable of pecuniary estimation.
 SECTION 7, RULE 141

(a) For filing an action or a permissive OR (b) For filing:

COMPULSORY counterclaim, CROSS-CLAIM, or
money claim against an estate not based on 1. Actions where the value of the
judgment, or for filing a third-party, fourth-party, subject matter cannot be estimated
etc. complaint, or a complaint-in-intervention, if
the total sum claimed, INCLUSIVE OF INTERESTS, 2. Special civil actions, except judicial
PENALTIES, SURCHARGES, DAMAGES OF
WHATEVER KIND, AND ATTORNEY’S FEES,
foreclosure of mortgage,
LITIGATIO NEXPENSES AND COSTS and/or in cases EXPROPRIATION PROCEEDINGS,
involving property, the FAIR MARKET value of PARTITION AND QUIETING OF TITLE
the REAL property in litigation STATED IN THE which will
CURRENT TAX DECLARATION OR CURRENT ZONAL
VALUATION OF THE BUREAU OF INTERNAL 3. All other actions not involving
REVENUE, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER, OR IF THERE IS
NONE, THE STATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN
property
LITIGATION OR THE VALUE OF THE PERSONAL
PROPERTY IN LITIGATION OR THE VALUE OF THE
PERSONAL PROPERTY IN LITIGATION AS ALLEGED
BY THE CLAIMANT
 ISSUE

WHETHER OR NOT RUBY

SHELTER PAID THE PROPER
AMOUNT OF DOCKET FEES
 RULING: NO

• Tan and Obiedo had the Deeds of

Absolute Sale notarized on 3 January 2006
and presented the same to Register of
Deeds for Naga City on 8 March 2006, they
were already issued TCTs over the real
properties in question, in their own names.
• Tan and Obiedo have also acquired
possession of the said properties, enabling
them to demolish the improvements thereon.
 RULING: NO

• The allegations and reliefs

sought in its Complaint in Civil
Case No. 2006-0030 appears to
be ultimately a real action,
involving as they do the recovery
of title to and possession of the
five parcels of land from Tan
and Obiedo.
 IN SUM

The Court finds that the true nature of the action

instituted by RUBY SHELTER is the recovery of title
to and possession of real property.
It is a real action necessarily involving real
property, the docket fees for which must be
computed in accordance with Section 7(a),
Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, as amended.
The Court of Appeals, therefore, did not commit
any error in affirming the RTC Orders requiring
RUBY SHELTER to pay additional docket fees for its
Complaint in Civil Case No. 2006-0030.