Editha Alviola V. CA
G.R. No. 117642
April 24, 1998
FACTS:
On March 29, 1988. Heirs of Tinagan filed a complaint for recovery of possession against Editha Alviola
before the RTC , branch 35 in Dumaguete City. Praying that they be declared the absolute owners of the
property in question and that for Edtiha Alviola to vacate the same, remove their copra dryer and store
and to pay actual damages in the form of rentals. The RTC awarded judgement in favor of the Heirs of
Tinagan hence Editha Alviola filed a motion for reconsideration with the CA. Alluding that they are the
rightful possessors by occupation of the property in question for more than 20 years.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not there was bad faith in the part of Editha Alviola
2. For purposes of indemnity, is Article 448 of the civil code applicable
RULING:
YES
There was bad faith in the part of Editha Alviola when they constructed the copra dryer and store on the
disputed portions while being fully aware that the property in question belonged to Victoria Tinagan.
And there was likewise bad faith on the part of The heirs of Tinagan, having knowledge of the
arrangement between spouses Alviola and Victoria Tinagan relative to the construction of the copra
dryer and store.
NO
To fall within the provision of this article, the construction must be of permanent character, attached to
the soil with an idea of perpetuity. As determined by the lower court, the copra dryer and store are
transferable in nature, hence, would not fall under the coverage of Art. 448.