Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1960 > November 1960 Decisions > G.R. No. L-14567 November 29, 1960 - ELENA PERALTA VDA. DE CAINA v. COURT OF APPEALS

110 Phil 164:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-14567. November 29, 1960.]

ELENA PERALTA VDA. DE CAINA, Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEALS (Sixth Division), LEONCIO CAINA and JACINTA CAINA, Respondents.

A.B. Encarnacion & Associates for Petitioner.

Jose Mendoza for Respondents.


SYLLABUS


1. COURTS; COURT OF APPEALS; JURISDICTION TO ISSUE AUXILIARY WRITS. — Pursuant to section 30 Republic Act No. 296, as amended, the Court of Appeals has original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and all other auxiliary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.

2. EXECUTION; MINISTERIAL DUTY OF TRIAL COURT ONCE JUDGMENT BECOME FINAL. — Once the judgment of the trial court becomes final and executory, it is the court’s ministerial duty to order its execution.


D E C I S I O N


PADILLA, J.:


This is an appeal of certiorari under Rule 46 from a judgment of the Court of Appeals, with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction. Upon the filing of the required bond, a writ of preliminary injunction was issued to enjoin the respondents Leoncio Caina and Jacinta Caina from praying for the execution of the decision and the Court of Appeals "from enforcing and executing the decision, Annex ‘G’ dated September 29, 1958." clubjuris

On 24 April 1957, the Court of First Instance of Rizal rendered judgment in civil case No. 3708, entitled "Leoncio Caina and Jacinta Caina, Plaintiffs, v. Elena Peralta Vda. de Caina, etc., Et Al., Defendants, Raymunda Damaso, intervenor," as follows:clubjuris

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs’ complaint is ordered dismissed, and judgment rendered declaring defendants, as successors of the deceased Valeriano Caina, to be the real and legal owner of the Lot No. 222-C. Piedad Estate Subdivision, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 21702; ordering the annotation of the deed of sale, Exhibit A — Intervenor, on the back of said Transfer Certificate of Title No. 21702. The counterclaim for actual and moral damages are (is) dismissed, but the Court awards the amount of P500.00 as reasonable attorney’s fees in favor of defendants, with costs against plaintiffs. (Annex A.)

On 9 May 1957, the plaintiffs received a copy of the judgment (Annex A). On 5 June 1957 the plaintiffs filed a record on appeal (Annex I), but did not file an appeal bond (Annex D). On 10 June 1957 the defendants filed a motion for execution (Annex B). On 14 June 1957 the plaintiffs filed an opposition thereto dated 13 June 1957, and prayed that the motion for execution be denied and that the plaintiffs be allowed to appeal as paupers, or, should their plea be denied, they be granted ten days within which to file an appeal bond (Annex C). On 19 July 1957 the trial court entered an order granting the defendants’ motion for execution and denying the plaintiffs’ motion praying that they be allowed to appeal as paupers or that they be granted ten days within which to file an appeal bond (Annex D). The Court denied the plaintiffs’ second and third motions for reconsideration on 10 December 1957 and 18 January 1958 (Annexes E and F).

The plaintiffs filed in the Court of Appeals a petition for a writ of certiorari to annul the orders dated 19 July 1957, denying the plaintiffs’ motion to be allowed to appeal as paupers and for extension of time within which to file an appeal bond and granting the motion for execution (Annex D), and 10 December 1957 and 18 January 1958, denying their motions for reconsideration (Annexes E and F); and mandamus to compel the respondent court to allow their appeal. On 29 September 1958 the Court of Appeals rendered judgment granting the writs prayed for (Annex G). On 21 October 1958, the Court of Appeals denied the defendants’ motion for reconsideration (Annex H).

On 24 October 1958 the defendants, hereafter referred to as the petitioners, filed in this Court an appeal by certiorari to review and annul the judgment of the Court of Appeals dated 29 September 1958 (Annex G), granting the plaintiffs’, hereafter referred to as the respondents, petition for a writ of certiorari and mandamus and resolution dated 21 October 1958 (Annex H), denying the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration. The petitioners claim that the Court of Appeals committed a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction and that they have no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. They also prayed for a writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin the respondents from seeking the execution of the judgment rendered by the Court of Appeals in their favor and the Court of Appeals from enforcing its judgment of 29 September 1958 (Annex G). As already stated at the beginning of this opinion, on 28 October 1958 this Court granted the writ of preliminary injunction prayed for and on the following day, after the petitioners had filed a bond in the sum of P200, this Court issued a writ of preliminary injunction.

In granting the writs prayed for by the respondents, the Court of Appeals held that although they had not filed an appeal bond, in their motion dated 31 May 1957 (Exhibit A, attached to Annex C), which was filed in the trial court before the expiration of the reglementary period within which to perfect an appeal, they prayed that they be allowed to appeal as paupers, or should their plea be denied, that they be granted ten days within which to file an appeal bond. According to the Court of Appeals, the trial court should have taken into consideration this particular prayed of the respondents.

There is no dispute that the Court of Appeals has original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, injunction, certiorari, habeas corpus, and all other auxiliary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction,1 and the writs of certiorari and mandamus granted by the Court of Appeals in its judgment dated 29 September 1958 (Annex G) were in the exercise of its jurisdiction. However, upon examination of the annexes, it appears that the factual basis for their issuance — the respondents’ motion dated 31 May 1957 (Exhibit A, attached to Annex C) — is not supported by the record. It appears that on 9 May 1957, the respondents received notice of judgment rendered by the trial court on 24 April 1957 (Annex C and Exhibit A attached thereto); that on 5 June 1957 the respondents filed a record on appeal (Annex I) but did not file an appeal bond (Annex D); and that the respondents’ motion dated 31 May 1957 was not filed before the expiration of the reglementary period of thirty days within which to perfect an appeal (which ended on 9 June 1957), but actually on 14 June 1957 (Annex I). As the judgment of the trial court dated 24 April 1957 (Annex A) already had become final and executory, it was its ministerial duty to order the execution of the judgment. The Court of Appeals erred in its pronouncement that the respondents’ motion dated 31 May 1957 was filed within the reglementary period for the perfection of the appeal. It was filed beyond such period.

The judgment rendered by the Court of Appeals on 29 September 1958 under review granting the writs prayed for by the respondents is set aside and the writ of preliminary injunction heretofore issued is made final, with costs against the respondents Leoncio Caina and Jacinta Caina.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepción, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Gutiérrez David, Paredes and Dizon, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Section 30, Republic Act No. 296, as amended.




Back to Home | Back to Main


ClubJuris.Com



November-1960 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-11001 November 23, 1960 - FORTUNATO V. BORROMEO v. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM

    110 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-12125 November 23, 1960 - LUIS G. ABLAZA v. AMANCIO SYCIP

    110 Phil 4

  • G.R. No. L-13251 November 23, 1960 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO., INC.

    110 Phil 9

  • G.R. No. L-14223 November 23, 1960 - SABINA SANTIAGO v. J. M. TUASON & CO., INC.

    110 Phil 16

  • G.R. No. L-14569 November 23, 1960 - BENITO CODILLA v. JOSE L. MARTINEZ

    110 Phil 24

  • G.R. No. L-14641 November 23, 1960 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. EUSTAQUIO DE LUNA

    110 Phil 28

  • G.R. No. L-14764 November 23, 1960 - CENON VILLANUEVA v. BARBER WILHELMSEN LINE

    110 Phil 34

  • G.R. No. L-14864 November 23, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO SOLON

    110 Phil 39

  • G.R. No. L-14897 November 23, 1960 - JESUS NEPOMUCENO v. REHABILITATION FINANCE CORPORATION

    110 Phil 42

  • G.R. No. L-15904 November 23, 1960 - ELIZALDE PAINT & OIL FACTORY, INC. v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA

    110 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. L-16022 November 23, 1960 - NATALIA B. NICOMEDES v. CHIEF OF CONSTABULARY

    110 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-13114 November 25, 1960 - ELENITA LEDESMA SILVA v. ESTHER PERALTA

    110 Phil 57

  • G.R. No. L-15276 November 28, 1960 - EPIFANIO J. ALANO v. CLARO CORTES

    110 Phil 74

  • G.R. No. L-7330 November 29, 1960 - JOSE BENARES v. CAPITOL SUBDIVISION, INC.

    110 Phil 79

  • G.R. No. L-10508 November 29, 1960 - PO ENG TRADING v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

    110 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. L-10810 November 29, 1960 - JOSEFINA RUIZ DE LUZURIAGA BLANCO v. COMPANIA GRAL. DE TABACOS DE FILIPINAS

    110 Phil 87

  • G.R. No. L-10836 November 29, 1960 - IN RE: PROCOPY MOSCAL v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    110 Phil 99

  • G.R. No. L-11325 November 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BOTO BALONTO

    110 Phil 102

  • G.R. No. L-11482 November 29, 1960 - ESTEBAN T. BUMANGLAG v. JOSE FERNANDEZ

    110 Phil 107

  • G.R. No. L-11837 November 29, 1960 - MAGDALENA G. VDA. DE CUAYCONG v. CRISTETA L. VDA. DE SENGBENGCO

    110 Phil 113

  • G.R. No. L-12275 November 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOTIMO RUBINIAL

    110 Phil 119

  • G.R. No. L-12508 November 29, 1960 - JOSE L. LAGRIMAS v. ROBERTO ZURBANO

    110 Phil 127

  • G.R. Nos. L-13107-08 November 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIO DELMAS

    110 Phil 132

  • G.R. No. L-13173 November 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO SORIO

    110 Phil 138

  • G.R. No. L-14217 November 29, 1960 - LUZ H. COLOMA v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    110 Phil 145

  • G.R. No. L-14274 November 29, 1960 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. SERREE INVESTMENT COMPANY

    110 Phil 148

  • G.R. No. L-14283 November 29, 1960 - GIL BALBUNA v. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION

    110 Phil 150

  • G.R. No. L-14382 November 29, 1960 - REMEDIOS CUENCO VDA. DE BORROMEO v. COURT OF APPEALS

    110 Phil 155

  • G.R. No. L-14559 November 29, 1960 - REYNALDO MADRIÑAN v. VICENTE G. SINCO

    110 Phil 160

  • G.R. No. L-14567 November 29, 1960 - ELENA PERALTA VDA. DE CAINA v. COURT OF APPEALS

    110 Phil 164

  • G.R. No. L-14594 November 29, 1960 - SEVERINO CAÑGAS v. TAN CHUAN LEONG

    110 Phil 168

  • G.R. No. L-14611 November 29, 1960 - EVANGELINO LASERNA v. MARIA JAVIER

    110 Phil 172

  • G.R. No. L-14656 November 29, 1960 - PHILIPPINE LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION (PLASLU) v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

    110 Phil 176

  • G.R. No. L-14682 November 29, 1960 - FRANCISCO EVARISTO v. OLEGARIO LASTRILLA

    110 Phil 181

  • G.R. No. L-14690 November 29, 1960 - JESUS S. DIZON v. JOSE T. GARCIA, SR.

    110 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. L-14769 November 29, 1960 - LAURO P. LEVISTE v. EUSEBIO F. RAMOS

    110 Phil 190

  • G.R. No. L-14780 November 29, 1960 - POMPEYO L. PALARCA v. RESTITUTA BAROL DE ANZON

    110 Phil 194

  • G.R. Nos. L-14785 & L-14923 November 29, 1960 - FELIX ABE v. FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION

    110 Phil 198

  • G.R. No. L-14983 November 29, 1960 - AGRIPINA VDA. DE ALBURO v. FILOMENA VDA. DE UMBAO

    110 Phil 210

  • G.R. No. L-15231 November 29, 1960 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARTEMIO PERVEZ

    110 Phil 214

  • G.R. No. L-15271 November 29, 1960 - ONG YET MUA HARDWARE CO. v. MANILA RAILROAD CO.

    110 Phil 219

  • G.R. No. L-15312 November 29, 1960 - IN RE: JUAN TACDORO v. JESUS ARCENAS

    110 Phil 222

  • G.R. No. L-15439 November 29, 1960 - ISAAC PERAL BOWLING ALLEY v. UNITED EMPLOYEES WELFARE ASSN.

    110 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. L-15551 November 29, 1960 - DAVID CONSUNJI v. MANILA PORT SERVICE

    110 Phil 231

  • G.R. No. L-15593 November 29, 1960 - MARIA BALDO v. PEDRO GUERRERO

    110 Phil 235

  • G.R. Nos. L-15618, L-16000 & L-16116 November 29, 1960 - ATLANTIC MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. v. MANILA PORT SERVICE

    110 Phil 240

  • G.R. No. L-15671 November 29, 1960 - AMERICAN PRESIDENT LINES, LTD. v. RICHARD A. KLEPPER

    110 Phil 243

  • G.R. No. L-15804 November 29, 1960 - SANCHO B. DE LEON v. ESTANISLAO FAUSTINO

    110 Phil 249

  • G.R. No. L-15925 November 29, 1960 - ESTELA FRANCISCO DE LASALA v. PEDRO SARNATE

    110 Phil 255

  • G.R. No. L-16028 November 29, 1960 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. DALMACIO URTULA

    110 Phil 262

  • G.R. No. L-16030 November 29, 1960 - SEGUNDA INOCANDO v. JUAN INOCANDO

    110 Phil 266

  • G.R. No. L-16068 November 29, 1960 - CONSUELO S. CALALANG v. INTESTATE ESTATE OF GERVACIO TANJANGCO

    110 Phil 270

  • G.R. No. L-16093 November 29, 1960 - LOCAL 7, PRESS & PRINTING FREE WORKERS v. EMILIANO TABIGNE

    110 Phil 276

  • G.R. No. L-16406 November 29, 1960 - PRIMO QUETULIO v. DELFIN B. FLORES

    110 Phil 284

  • G.R. Nos. L-16409 & L-16416 November 29, 1960 - ALEJANDRO L. GUMPAL v. MANUEL ARRANZ

    110 Phil 287

  • G.R. No. L-16523 November 29, 1960 - LUIS G. PERALTA v. FELIXBERTO SERRANO

    110 Phil 301