84.

SPOUSES Hontiveros v RTC OF ILOILO

FACTS:  Petitioners, spouses Augusto and Maria Hontiveros, filed a complaint for damages
against private respondents Gregorio Hontiveros and Teodora Ayson. Petr alleged that they
are the owners of a parcel of land and that they were deprived of income from the said
lands consisting of rentals from tenants of the land and that Gregorio withheld possession
of the land in bad faith.
In their answer, private respondents denied the allegations and invoked that he and
respondent Ayson were not married. On the contrary, they alleged that the possession of
the subject property had already been transferred to petitioners since 1985 by virtue of
writ of possession.
Moreover, considering the foregoing facts, resps assert petrs were receiving rentals
from the lands, hence, the complaint has no cause of action since it did not allege that
earnest efforts towards a compromise had been made, considering that Augusto &
Gregorio are brothers.
Petitioners filed an Amended Complaint to insert the allegation that “earnest efforts
towards a compromise have been made between the parties but the same were
unsuccessful”. Respondents answered the Amended Complaint and denied the same.
Petitioners moved for a judgment of pleadings on the ground that respondents did not
tender an issue. The RTC denied the petr’s motion & at the same time dismissed the case on
the ground of unverified complaint pursuant to Article 151 of the Family Code and
therefore, it did not believe that earnest efforts had been made to arrive at a compromise.
Petitioners moved for a reconsideration but was denied. Hence, this present case.

ISSUE: WON the RTC erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that it does not
allege under oath that earnest efforts toward a compromise were made prior to the filing as
required by Article 151 of the Family Code?
WON Article 151 of the Family Code applies in this case?

HELD: Yes, the Court erred in dismissing the complaint on the ground that verified
complaint of earnest efforts to a compromise only because the trial court could not believe
the veracity of the allegation. The Court emphasized that the absence of the verification
required in Article 151 does not affect the jurisdiction of the Court over the subject matter
of the complaint. Such verification is merely a formal requirement intended to secure
assurance that matters which are alleged are true and correct.
Under Article 151 of the Family Code, “No suit between members of the same family
shall prosper unless it should appear from the verified complaint or petition that earnest
efforts towards a compromise have been made, but that the same have failed. If it is shown
that no such efforts were in fact made, the case must be dismissed.”
Petitioner’s contention that Article 151 of the FC does not apply to the case is correct
since the suit is not exclusively among the family members. Under the subject provision,
the phrase “members of the same family” refers to the husband and wife; parents and
children; ascendants and descendants; and brothers and sisters.
 Respondent Ayson and Petitioner Hontiveros (Maria) are considered strangers to the
Hontiveros family for purposes of Art. 151, therefore, they are not members of the family.
In several jurisprudence, the Court already decided that “whenever a stranger is a party
in the case involving the family members, the requisit showing the earnest efforts to
compromise is no longer mandatory”.