Quijano v. Atty.

Amante,54 the Court ruled that in an action for unlawful detainer, the plaintiff
must show that the possession was initially lawful, and thereafter, establish the basis of such
lawful possession. Similarly, should the plaintiff claim that the respondent's possession was by
his/her tolerance, then such acts of tolerance must be proved. A bare allegation of tolerance will
not suffice. At least, the plaintiff must point to the overt acts indicative of his/her or
predecessor's permission to occupy the disputed property. Failing in this regard, the occupant's
possession could then be deemed to have been illegal from the beginning. Consequently, the
action for unlawful detainer will fail. Neither may the ejectment suit be treated as one for forcible
entry in the absence of averments that the entry in the property had been effected through
force, intimidation, threats, strategy or stealth.