G.R. No. 127692. March 10, 2004
Posted by: Rianne Fernandez
FACTS:
The spouses Jesus and Caridad Trocino mortgaged two parcels of land to Dr. Clarence Yujuico. The mortgage was subsequently foreclosed and the properties sold at public auction, and before the expiry of the redemption period, the spouses Trocino sold the property to petitioners on, who in turn, redeemed the same from Dr. Yujuico. The spouses Trocino, however, refused to convey ownership of the properties to petitioners, hence, the complaint for specific performance. Through their counsel, the defendant filed their answer and the said pleading was verified by their mother, Caridad Trocino. RTC rendered its decision in favor of the plaintiffs. However, Adolfo and Mariano Trocino filed a petition for the annulment of the judgment. They alleged that the trial court's decision is null and void on the grounds that it did not acquire jurisdiction over their persons as they were not validly served with a copy of the summons of the complaint. The same was granted by the Court of Appeals. Hence this motion for reconsideration.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the complaint filed for specific performance was an action in personam.
HELD:
Contrary to petitioners belief, the complaint they filed for specific performance and/or rescission is not an action in rem. While it is a real action because it affects title to or possession of the two parcels of land covered by TCT Nos. 10616 and 31856, it does not automatically follow that the action is already one in rem. In Hernandez vs. Rural Bank of Lucena, Inc., the Court made the following distinction:
In a personal action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery of personal property, the enforcement of a contract or the recovery of damages. In a real action, the plaintiff seeks the recovery of real property, or, as indicated in section 2(a) of Rule 4, a real action is an action affecting title to real property or for the recovery of possession, or for partition or condemnation of, or foreclosure of a mortgage on, real property.
An action in personam is an action against a person on the basis of his personal liability, while an action in rem is an action against the thing itself, instead of against the person. Hence, a real action may at the same time be an action in personam and not necessarily an action in rem.[
The objective sought in petitioners complaint was to establish a claim against respondents for their alleged refusal to convey to them the title to the two parcels of land that they inherited from their father, Jesus Trocino, who was one of the sellers of the properties to petitioners. Hence, to repeat, Civil Case No. CEB-11103 is an action in personam because it is an action against persons, namely, herein respondents, on the basis of their personal liability. As such, personal service of summons upon the defendants is essential in order for the court to acquire of jurisdiction over their persons.
WHEREFORE, the petition for review is DENIED. The decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioners.
