Short answer. Thirty days. In an ejectment case, Rule 70, Section 11 requires the court to render judgment within thirty days after receipt of the affidavits and position papers, or the expiration of the period for filing them. If the court asks for clarification, judgment must follow within fifteen days of the last clarificatory affidavit.
What the law says
Within thirty days after receipt of the affidavits and position papers, or the expiration of the period for filing the same, the court shall render judgment.
Rule 70, Section 11 — Period for rendition of judgment. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The court shall not resort to the foregoing procedure just to gain time for the rendition of the judgment.
Rule 70, Section 11 — Period for rendition of judgment. Read the full provision →
The thirty-day clock and where it starts
Ejectment — unlawful detainer and forcible entry — is designed to be decided on papers, not on drawn-out hearings, and Section 11 puts a number on it: Within thirty days after receipt of the affidavits and position papers, or the expiration of the period for filing the same, the court shall render judgment. Note where the clock starts. It is not the filing of the complaint but the completion of the parties' written submissions — or the lapse of the period for filing them, so a party who files nothing cannot stall the case by its own silence.
The clarification detour
The thirty days is not always the end of the story. The section provides that should the court find it necessary to clarify certain material facts, it may, during the said period, issue an order specifying the matters to be clarified, and require the parties to submit affidavits or other evidence on those matters within ten days from receipt of said order. Judgment then follows a fresh, shorter deadline: within fifteen days after the receipt of the last affidavit or the expiration of the period for filing the same.
The Rule polices its own exception
A clarification order could obviously become a delay device — order more papers, restart the clock — and the drafters saw it coming: The court shall not resort to the foregoing procedure just to gain time for the rendition of the judgment. That sentence has no counterpart in most procedural provisions, and it tells you how seriously the summary character of ejectment is meant to be taken. Clarification exists for genuinely unclear material facts, not as breathing room. The deadlines in this section are addressed to the court, but parties who know them can hold the proceedings to them.
Reading the timeline as a party
For a property owner, the practical arithmetic starts when the last position paper goes in — that filing, or the lapse of the period for it, is what starts the thirty days. For an occupant, the same dates say how quickly a decision may realistically arrive, which frames every choice about negotiating or vacating. Keep copies, with dates, of every submission and order: whether the case is inside or outside the section's deadlines is a question of record, and a lawyer asked to assess a stalled ejectment will begin exactly there.