Ejectment Case or Reivindicatory Action: which is the proper remedy to recover possession of real property?

Published on July 29, 2023

By Karen G. Supapo

The short answer to this question is, it depends. The proper remedy will depend on the factual milieu of your case. It is well-settled that a person can recover possession over his/her real property either by filing an accion interdictal, accion publiciana, or accion reivindicatoria before the appropriate Court of law.

In accion interdictal, there are two distinct causes of action: Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer. A case for Forcible Entry exists when the dispossession from the very beginning occurred by means of force, intimidation, strategy, threats, or stealth. Whereas in unlawful detainer case, one illegally withholds possession after the expiration or termination of his/her right to hold possession under any contract, express or implied. The issue to be resolved in accion interdictal is who between the parties has the better right of possession, independent of title. In other words, an accion interdictal (Forcible Entry or Unlawful Detainer)  is a summary action that determines the right to physical possession, independent of ownership. That said, even if a party is the registered owner of the property, the possession of the property cannot be wrested from the party in peaceable quiet possession thereof through a summary action for ejectment without proving to the Court that he/she has the prior actual possession over the property before the dispossession took place. Consequently, a party who can prove prior possession can recover such possession even against the owner himself in accion interdictal.[1] Moreover, these two cases must be filed within one (1) year from the date of actual entry of the land in Forcible Entry case, and from the date of the last demand in Unlawful Detainer case.

Accordingly, if the date of actual entry of the land in Forcible Entry case, and the date of the last demand in Unlawful Detainer case is already more than one (1) year, then, either accion publiciana or accion reivindicatoria is the proper remedy depending again on the factual circumstance of the case and the ground the person claiming to recover possession over the property will rely upon. 

In accion publiciana, this remedy prescribes in ten (10) years from dispossession. Same with accion interdictal, the issue to be resolve in accion publiciana is who between the parties has the better right of possession independent of title. Thus, the person claiming recovery of possession must prove to the Court that he/she has the prior actual possession over the property before the dispossession took place.

In accion reinvindicatoria or accion de reivindicacion,  the person claiming to recover possession over the property alleges ownership of the parcel of land and seeks recovery of its full possession. The issue involved in and determined through accion reinvindicatoria is the recovery of ownership of real property. This action can be filed when the dispossession lasted for more than one year.[2]

In case the dispossession is more than (10) years, the proper remedy could be accion reivindicatoria. As stated above, the person claiming to recover possession over the property must now prove that he/she is the owner of the real property and is required to identify the property he/she wants to recover.

Indeed, the possession over real property may be recovered depending on the factual milieu of the case, and thus, due diligence is crucial in the success of your case. If you wish to seek legal assistance from a lawyer to recover your possession over your real property, you may inquire KS Law Office at concierge@kslawph.com.   

[1] Dayandayan et al v. Spouses Rojas, G.R. No. 15 July 2020

[2] Martinez v. Heirs of Lim, G.R. No. 234655, 11 September 2019