91.

Copioso vs Copioso
GR No. 149243
October 28, 2002
Facts: Respondents are praying for the reconveyance of the property by virtue of their being
co-owners thereof. Petitioners moved to dismiss the complaint on that ground that it was the
MTC and not the RTC that had jurisdiction considering that the assessed value of the
property was lower than P20,000.00. Petitioners argue that the complaint for reconveyance
cannot be resolved unless the trial court delves upon the issues of “title, possession and
interests” of each of the stakeholders over the subject parcels of land.

Issue: WON denial of the motion to dismiss was correct.

Ruling: Yes. Although the assessed value of the two parcels of land involved is P3,770.00,
which is within the jurisdiction of the MTC, the action filed by the respondents is for specific
performance of reconveyance, annulment of contracts and claim for damages, which are
incapable of pecuniary estimation and thus properly within the jurisdiction of the RTC.
If the action affects the title to or possession of real property then it is a real action and
jurisdiction is determined by the assessed value of the property. It is within the jurisdiction
therefore of the Metropolitan Trial Court.

92. Capiral vs Valenzuela

GR No. 152886
November 15, 2002
Facts: Petitioner Capiral filed a complaint against respondent spouses Valenzuela for
specific performance. The trial court dismissed the complaint alleging that the Court has no
jurisdiction over this case considering that the assessed value of the lots in question is only
P336,800.00.

Issue: Whether or not the trial court validly dismissed the complaint.

Ruling: Yes. The trial court considered that neither the assessed value of the lots
(P336,800.00) nor the amount of damages claimed (P102,000.00) exceeded P400,000.00.
In this case, the trial court held itself to be without jurisdiction over the case because the
case fell within the original exclusive jurisdiction of inferior courts pursuant to the provision of
B.P. Blg. 129.

93. Bardillon vs Barangay Masili

GR No. 146886
April 30, 2003
Facts: Two lots measuring 144 square meters was to be expropriated by Bargy Masili for the
purpose of constructing a barangay hall. However, the barangay and the lot owners could
not agree with the purchase price of Php 200,000. The first complaint was filed before the
MTC. Whereas, the second complaint was filed before the RTC. The MTC dismissed the
complaint for lack of interest of the petitioner lot owners. The RTC stated that the MTC has
no jurisdiction over the case. It also ruled in favor of Brgy Masili.

Issue: Whether or not the MTC has jurisdiction over the case of expropriation?

Ruling: No. The SC held that the expropriation proceedings is within the jurisdiction of the
RTC because it is incapable of pecuniary estimation. An expropriation suit does not involve
the recovery of a sum of money. Rather, it deals with the exercise by the government of its
authority and right to take property for public use. As such, it is incapable of pecuniary
estimation and should be filed with the regional trial courts.