Reyes v.

Raval Reyes
Facts:
1. Petitioners Mateo, Francisco, and Juan Reyes owns Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 covered by
OCT 22161, and Lots 5 and 6, covered by OCT 8066.
2. Mateo and Juan later filed for an issuance of a Writ of Possession over all the
lots against Mateo Raval Reyes (not the same Mateo).
3. Raval Reyes opposed. According to him he was only occupying the lots under
OCT 22161 and not the lots under OCT 8066.
4. Raval Reyes, however, claims that he should be entitled to the lots covered by
OCT 8066 as he previously bought the ⅓ undivided share of Francisco.
5. The court granted the Writs of Possession applied for by Mateo and Juan. No
appeal by Raval Reyes was made.
6. Mateo and Juan then filed an ordinary civil action against Raval Reyes for the
recovery of the products of the land or their value.
7. Of course, Raval Reyes opposed. Duh.
8. So Mateo and Juan filed a motion to compel Raval Reyes to surrender to them
his owner’s duplicate of OCT Nos. 22161 and 8066.
9. RTC denied the motion as the lands are still subjects of litigation in the civil case
that has not yet been decided on the merits.
10. Mateo and Juan argues otherwise claiming that the subject of the civil case is the
products of the land and not the land itself.
11. They further argue that since Raval Reyes already raised the issue of ownership
and possession when he opposed to the motion for a writ of possession and did
not file any appeal, Raval Reyes is barred and estopped and barred by res
judicata.
12. Raval Reyes argues that since Francisco, the other co-owner, was not
impleaded, the writ of possession issued by the RTC only covers the ⅔ portion of
the land, and not his ⅓ bought.

Issue:
1. Who has the better right over the lands and the duplicates of both OCTs?
Ruling:
1. The person whose name is registered and inscribed in the OCT has a better right
to the possession that a person whose name does not appear in the certificate
and has yet to establish possession.
2. Mateo and Juan already availed of an independent civil action to recover their ⅓
co-owners share by filing a counterclaim in the ordinary civil action. His rights are
now protected.
3. They may also may also avail of the notice of lis pendens.
4. Raval Reyes was ordered to surrender the duplicates of the OCTs.