Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
De, J., (2019). Resumen De Expediente Civil N° 7921-2008, Prescripción Adquisitiva [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional, Universidad Peruana de las Américas]. http://repositorio.ulasamericas.edu.pe/handle/upa/769
De, J., Resumen De Expediente Civil N° 7921-2008, Prescripción Adquisitiva [Trabajo de suficiencia profesional]. : Universidad Peruana de las Américas; 2019. http://repositorio.ulasamericas.edu.pe/handle/upa/769
@misc{renati/4779,
title = "Resumen De Expediente Civil N° 7921-2008, Prescripción Adquisitiva",
author = "De La Puente Pérez, Jorge Luis",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de las Américas",
year = "2019"
}
Title: Resumen De Expediente Civil N° 7921-2008, Prescripción Adquisitiva
Other Titles: Resumen De Expediente Penal N° 0158-2005, Robo Agravado
Authors(s): De La Puente Pérez, Jorge Luis
Keywords: Expediente; demanda; prescripción adquisitiva; proceso; sentencia
Issue Date: Aug-2019
Institution: Universidad Peruana de las Américas
Abstract: El presente trabajo está orientado a realizar un resumen analítico del Expediente Civil N° 7921-2008, el cual, una vez estudiado y analizado se constató que la demanda fue interpuesta por Sixto Alejandro Díaz Arango y Rosa Julia Tavera Alarcón, ante el 38° Juzgado Civil de Lima, por prescripción adquisitiva de dominio, en contra de la Asociación de Propietarios de la Urbanización San Juan Masías, peticionando que se declare a los demandantes como propietarios del inmueble, ubicado en la calle de la Naturaleza Mz. “A”, lote 38 de la Asociación demandada, por estar en su posesión a título de propietarios por más de 10 años, al amparo del artículo 950 y otros pertinentes del Código Civil.
El trámite del expediente en estudio, se realizó en la vía de proceso abreviado, demanda que en primera instancia fue declarada fundada, en consecuencia, se declara a los demandantes como propietarios por prescripción adquisitiva de dominio del bien inmueble en litigio, sin embargo, los Magistrados de la Primera Sala Civil de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Lima, revocaron la sentencia de primera instancia y reformulándola declararon infundada la demanda; finalmente los Jueces Supremos de la Sala Civil Transitoria de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de la República, declararon improcedente el recurso de casación interpuesto por los accionantes; de esta forma, se le dio la razón a la Asociación emplazada, no operando la prescripción adquisitiva de dominio, al haberse tomado en consideración que los demandantes no habían aportado dinero alguno para la compra del terreno del Estado y por haber sido separados como socios, además que en todo momento se les requirió a los demandantes para que se pongan a derecho conforme lo establecía el Estatuto de la Asociación, se les curso cartas notariales y se les invitó a conciliar, obteniendo su negativa, acciones que interrumpieron el plazo para solicitar la prescripción prescriptiva de dominio; asimismo se observó que el trámite del expediente en estudio se efectuó en forma regular cumpliendo con los plazos establecidos por ley, sin embargo, se incurrió en algunas deficiencias y contradicciones entre las instancias, conforme se detalla en el presente trabajo.
The present work is oriented to make an analytical summary of Civil File N° 7921-2008, which, once studied and analyzed, found that the lawsuit was filed by Sixto Alejandro Díaz Arango and Rosa Julia Tavera Alarcón, before the 38th Court Civil de Lima, by purchasing prescription of ownership, against the Association of Owners of the Urbanization San Juan Masías, requesting that the plaintiffs be declared as owners of the property, located on calle de la Naturaleza Mz. “A”, lot 38 of the defendant Association, for being, in their possession as owners for more than 10 years, under article 950 and other pertinent Civil Code. The processing of the file under study was carried out in the abbreviated process, a claim that in the first instance was declared founded, consequently, the plaintiffs are declared as owners by the acquisition of ownership of the immovable property in dispute, however, the Judges of the First Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima, revoked the judgment of first instance and reformulating it declared the claim unfounded; finally, the Supreme Judges of the Transitional Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic declared the appeal filed by the shareholders unfair; In this way, the Association located was given the reason, not operating the domain acquisition prescription, having taken into consideration that the plaintiffs had not contributed any money for the purchase of the State land and for having been separated as partners, in addition that at all times the plaintiffs were required to be brought to law as established by the Statute of the Association, notarial letters were issued and they were invited to reconcile, obtaining their refusal, actions that interrupted the deadline to request the prescriptive prescription of domain; It was also observed that the processing of the file under study was carried out on a regular basis complying with the deadlines established by law, however, some deficiencies and contradictions were incurred between the instances, as detailed in the present work.
The present work is oriented to make an analytical summary of Civil File N° 7921-2008, which, once studied and analyzed, found that the lawsuit was filed by Sixto Alejandro Díaz Arango and Rosa Julia Tavera Alarcón, before the 38th Court Civil de Lima, by purchasing prescription of ownership, against the Association of Owners of the Urbanization San Juan Masías, requesting that the plaintiffs be declared as owners of the property, located on calle de la Naturaleza Mz. “A”, lot 38 of the defendant Association, for being, in their possession as owners for more than 10 years, under article 950 and other pertinent Civil Code. The processing of the file under study was carried out in the abbreviated process, a claim that in the first instance was declared founded, consequently, the plaintiffs are declared as owners by the acquisition of ownership of the immovable property in dispute, however, the Judges of the First Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima, revoked the judgment of first instance and reformulating it declared the claim unfounded; finally, the Supreme Judges of the Transitional Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic declared the appeal filed by the shareholders unfair; In this way, the Association located was given the reason, not operating the domain acquisition prescription, having taken into consideration that the plaintiffs had not contributed any money for the purchase of the State land and for having been separated as partners, in addition that at all times the plaintiffs were required to be brought to law as established by the Statute of the Association, notarial letters were issued and they were invited to reconcile, obtaining their refusal, actions that interrupted the deadline to request the prescriptive prescription of domain; It was also observed that the processing of the file under study was carried out on a regular basis complying with the deadlines established by law, however, some deficiencies and contradictions were incurred between the instances, as detailed in the present work.
Link to repository: http://repositorio.ulasamericas.edu.pe/handle/upa/769
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Universidad Peruana de las Américas. Facultad de Derecho
Grade or title: Abogado
Register date: 14-Nov-2019; 14-Nov-2019
Files in This Item:
File | Description | Size | Format | |
---|---|---|---|---|
EXPEDIENTE CIVIL - PRESCRIPCIÓN ADQUISITIVA (3).pdf Restricted Access | 21.72 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License