ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.

com™

Share
Search
 Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year
2015 > August 2015 Decisions > G.R. No. 163504,
August 05, 2015 - BERLINDA ORIBELLO, Petitioner,
v. COURT OF APPEALS (SPECIAL FORMER TENTH
DIVISION), AND REMEDIOS ORIBELLO,
Search
Respondents.:
G.R. No. 163504, August 05, 2015 - BERLINDA ORIBELLO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF
APPEALS (SPECIAL FORMER TENTH DIVISION), AND REMEDIOS ORIBELLO,
Respondents.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 163504, August 05, 2015

BERLINDA ORIBELLO, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS (SPECIAL

FORMER TENTH DIVISION), AND REMEDIOS ORIBELLO, Respondents.

DECISION

BERSAMIN, J.:

The surviving spouse of the deceased registered owner of the property subject of this
action for partition appeals the Decision promulgated on July 31, 2003, 1 whereby the
Court of Appeals (CA), reviewing the Judgment rendered by the Regional Trial Court
 DebtKollect Company, Inc.

ChanRobles Intellectual Property

Division
(RTC), Branch 31, in Agoo, La Union on March 30, 1998 in Civil Case No. A-1757
entitled Remedios Oribello, represented by her Atty.-in-Fact Alfredo Selga v. Berlinda
P. Oribello,2 disposed as follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision is VACATED and SET

ASIDE and the case REMANDED to the lower court for the second
phase of a partition suit without prejudice to the filing, if still available, of
either a petition for relief from the decree of adoption rendered in Sp. Proc.
No. R-94 of the then Court of First Instance of Occidental Mindoro
(Branch II) or an action for annulment thereof.

SO ORDERED.3ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Antecedents

The assailed Decision of the CA summarized the factual and procedural antecedents of
the case, as follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Before the Regional Trial Court of La Union (Branch 31) was an action for
partition and damages involving twelve parcels of land xxx situated at Sta.
Rita, Agoo, La Union. Eight of said parcels are declared for taxation
purposes in the name of Toribio Oribello xxx, two in the names of Toribio
and Rosenda Oribello, one in the names of Toribio and and Berlinda
Padilla Oribello xxx, and one in the names of Toribio and Ma. Emilia
Oribello x x x.

Toribio was twice married. His first wife was Emilia. On September 10,
1981, Toribio's marriage to Emilia was dissolved pursuant to the decision
of the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, U.S.A.
 On March 10, 1982, Toribio married appellee before the municipal mayor
of Agoo, La Union. He died intestate on August 18, 1993.

Instituted on May 27, 1997 by Rcmedios Oribello xxx, represented by her

natural father Alfredo Selga xxx, against appellee, the action was anchored
on the theory that appellant is an adopted daughter of Toribio per decision
dated March 26, 1974 xxx of the then Court of First Instance x x x of
Occidental Mindoro (Branch II) in Sp. Proc. No. R-94 x x x granting the
petition of Toribio and Emilia, who were childless, for adoption of
appellant, then eight years old.

Denying that appellant is an adopted daughter of Toribio, appellee averred

in her answer that the decree of adoption was fraudulently secured by
Alfredo; that the proceedings in the first adoption case and the decree of
adoption are void ab initio; that Toribio could not have filed the first
adoption case in Occidental Mindoro because he was a resident of Agoo, La
Union throughout his life; that the Toribio referred to in the first adoption
case and appellee's husband, Toribio, are two different persons; that the
birth certificate of appellant was simulated; that appellant never lived with
nor submitted herself to the parental authority and care of Toribio even
after appellee's marriage to him; that Alfredo's fraudulent scheme was
shown by his filing of another petition for adoption in 1983 in the Regional
Trial Court of Occidental Mindoro (Branch 45), docketed as Sp. Proc. No.
R-274 xxx, which was archived per order of said court dated December 18,
1986.4ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Judgment of the RTC

On March 30, 1998, the RTC rendered its Judgment after trial, ruling as
follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
 WHEREFORE, this case is hereby DISMISSED.

Plaintiff Remedios Selga is not a co-owner of the properties enumerated in

paragraph 5 of the Complaint, which defendant inherited from Toribio
Oribello except those described in subparagraphs 8, 11 and 12 of said
paragraph 5. Said three (3) parcels of land are unknown to and not in the
possession of defendant (see, Par. 4 of the Answer with Motion to
Dismiss).

This Court awards defendant TWENTY-FIVE TFIOUSAND PESOS

(P25,000.00) in attorney's fees to be paid by plaintiff.

SO ORDERED.5 (Underscoring supplied)ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Decision of the CA

On appeal, respondent Remedios Oribello sought the reversal of the judgment of the
RTC, insisting that the trial court erred:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

1. IN DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT BY STATING IN ITS

DECISION THAT THE PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT IS NOT A CO-
OWNER OF THE PROPERTIES ENUMERATED IN THE
COMPLAINT;cralawlawlibrary

August-2015 Jurisprudence
2. IN FINDING THAT THE DECISION IN SPC. PROC. NO. R-94 WAS
OBTAINED THRU FRAUD AND MACHINATION;cralawlawlibrary
· G.R. No. 197709, August 03, 2015 - JOSE YULO AGRICULTURAL
CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES PERLA CABAYLO DAVIS AND
SCOTT DAVIS, Respondents.
3. IN NULLIFYING THE DECISION IN SPC. PROC. R-94 WHICH
HAS LONG BECOME FINAL AND EXECUTORY; and
· G.R. No. 200969, August 03, 2015 - CONSOLACION D. ROMERO
AND ROSARIO S.D. DOMINGO, Petitioners, v. ENGRACIA D. SINGSON,
Respondent.

· G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 2015 - JUAN PONCE ENRILE,

4. IN AWARDING DEFENDANT-APPELLEE ATTORNEY'S FEES.6
Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (THIRD DIVISION), AND PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
On July 31, 2003,7 the CA promulgated its Decision, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
· A.C. No. 8708 (CBD Case No. 08-2192), August 12, 2015 -
WHEREFORE, the appealed decision is VACATED and SET
SPOUSES BYRON AND MARIA LUISA SAUNDERS, Complainants, v.
ATTY. LYSSA GRACE S. PAGANO-CALDE, Respondent.
ASIDE and the case REMANDED to the lower court for the second
phase of a partition suit without prejudice to the filing, if still available, of
· G.R. No. 177803, August 03, 2015 - SPOUSES EMILIANO L. either a petition for relief from the decree of adoption rendered in Sp. Proc.
JALBAY, SR. AND MAMERTA C. JALBAY, Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL BANK, Respondent. No. R-94 of the then Court of First Instance of Occidental Mindoro
(Branch II) or an action for annulment thereof.
· G.R. No. 201365, August 03, 2015 - THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANUELA FLORES Y SALAZAR @
WELLA Accused-Appellant. SO ORDERED.8ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
The CA pointed out that even if the adoption proceedings had suffered from infirmities,
· G.R. No. 198908, August 03, 2015 - VIRGINIA OCAMPO, the RTC did not have the authority to annul the adoption decree and to dismiss the
Petitioner, v. DEOGRACIO OCAMPO, Respondent.
complaint for partition for that reason; and that at any rate the petitioner still had the
· G.R. No. 195175, August 10, 2015 - COMMISSIONER OF
option either to file a petition for relief or an action for the annulment of the adoption
INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. TOLEDO POWER COMPANY,
Respondent.; G.R. NO. 199645 - TOLEDO POWER COMPANY,
decree in the appropriate court.chanrobleslaw
Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

Issue
· G.R. No. 213233, August 05, 2015 - BLISS DEVELOPMENT
CORP./HOME GUARANTY CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. MONTANO
DIAZ, DOMINGO TAPAY, AND EDGAR H. ARREZA, Respondents.
Hence, this appeal, with the petitioner asserting that:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
x x x THERE IS GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION COMMITTED IN THE
· G.R. No. 197953, August 05, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (2ND DIVISION), DECISION AS IT WRONGFULLY ALLOWED THE ILLEGAL USE OF A
QUINTIN SALUDAGA Y BORDEOS, ARTHUS ADRIATICO Y ERUDA AND
ROMEO DE LUNA, Respondents. SURNAME BY THE RESPONDENT TO PURSUE A FRAUDULENT
CLAIM AGAINST THE SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS OF THE PETITIONER
· G.R. No. 187524, August 05, 2015 - SPOUSES MARIA BUTIONG AND OF AN INDISPENSABLE PARTY WHO WAS NOT IMPLEADED AS
AND FRANCISCO VILLAFRIA, SUBSTITUTED BY DR. RUEL B.
VILLAFRIA, Petitioners, v. MA. GRACIA RIÑOZA PLAZO AND MA. FE
RIÑOZA ALARAS, Respondents.
ANY PARTY TO THE COMPLAINT.9

· G.R. No. 209447, August 11, 2015 - PRESIDENTIAL x x x THERE IS SERIOUS ERROR IN THE DECISION, AS IT IS
COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG), Petitioner, v. HON.
WINLOVE M. DUMAYAS, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, PREMISED ON MISAPPREHENSION OF FACTS WHICH
BRANCH 59, MAKATI CITY AND UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK
(UCPB), Respondents.; G.R. NO. 210901 - PRESIDENTIAL WRONGFULLY SUSTAINED THE MANIFESTLY FRAUDULENT CLAIM
COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT (PCGG), Petitioner, v. HON.
WINLOVE M. DUMAYAS, PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT,
BRANCH 59, MAKATI CITY AND UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS LIFE
BY THE FATHER OF THE RESPONDENT OF HER FILIATION WITH
ASSURANCE CORPORATION (COCOLIFE), Respondents.
THE HUSBAND OF THE PETITIONER, WHICH IS NOW BEING
INTERPOSED LONG AFTER HIS DEATH AND THRU A PETITION
· G.R. No. 188739, August 05, 2015 - BENJAMIN E. RAVAGO,
WHEREIN HE WAS NEVER A PARTY OR PETITIONER. 10
Petitioner, v. METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY,
SUBSTITUTED BY BRIGHT VENTURES REALTY, INC., Respondents.

x x x THERE IS ERROR OF LAW COMMITTED IN THE DECISION, AS IT

· G.R. No. 215714, August 12, 2015 - OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EFREN BASAL CAYAS, Accused-Appellant. TOTALLY DISREGARDED THE DULY ESTABLISHED RULE AND
JURISPRUDENCE THAT THE COUNTERCLAIM IN THE ANSWER OF
· A.M. No. 11238-Ret., August 18, 2015 - IN RE: EXPIRATION OF THE PETITION IS A DIRECT ATTACK ON THE NULLITY OF THE
FIXED TERM OF OFFICE OF ATTY. SAADUDDIN A. ALAUYA, OFFICE OF
THE JURISCONSULT, ZAMBOANGA CITY ALLEGED PETITION AND JUDGMENT OF ADOPTION, AND THAT
THE TRIAL COURT HAS THE AUTHORITY TO SET ASIDE THE SAID
· G.R. No. 167838, August 05, 2015 - JOSE V. TOLEDO, GLENN
NULL AND VOID JUDGMENT AND TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT. 11
PADIERNOS AND DANILO PADIERNOS, Petitioner, v. COURT OF
APPEALS, LOURDES RAMOS, ENRIQUE RAMOS, ANTONIO RAMOS,
MILAGROS RAMOS AND ANGELITA RAMOS AS HEIRS OF SOCORRO
RAMOS, GUILLERMO PABLO, PRIMITIVA CRUZ AND A.R.C.
MARKETING CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, x x x THE PETITION HAS TO BE GIVEN DUE COURSE, IN ORDER
ALBERTO C. DY, Respondents.
THAT THE MANDATES OF THE RULES AGAINST MULTIPLICITY OF
SUITS SHALL BE UPHELD, PARTICULARLY THE GRANT OF THE
· A.C. No. 10635, August 26, 2015 - NOEL S. SORREDA,
Complainant, v. ATTY. DAVID L. KHO, Respondent. COUNTERCLAIM OF THE PETITION FOR DECLARATION OF NULLITY
OF THE ALLEGED PETITION AND JUDGMENT OF ADOPTION, AS
· A.M. No. P-14-3253, August 19, 2015 - NICETAS TANIEZA- WELL AS FOR THE FULL APPLICATION OF THE RULES ON
CALAYOAN, Complainant, v. ELMER JERRY C. CALAYOAN, PROCESS
SERVER, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 2, BANGUED, ABRA,
Respondent.
INTESTATE PROCEEDINGS UNDER RULE 90 OF THE REVISED
RULES OF COURT, FOR A FINAL RESOLUTION OF THE
· A.C. No. 8084, August 24, 2015 - PATROCINIA H. SALABAO, SUBSTANTIVE RIGHTS OF THE PARTIES IN ONE AND SINGLE
Complainant, v. ATTY. ANDRES C. VILLARUEL, JR., Respondent.
PROCEEDING, THRU THE INSTANT
12
PETITION. ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
· A.C. No. 9834, August 26, 2015 - SAMUEL B. ARNADO,
In her comment,13 respondent Remedios Oribello insists that she had the right to the
Complainant, v. ATTY. HOMOBONO A. ADAZA, Respondent.

partition as the adopted daughter of the late Toribio Oribello; that the petitioner raised a
· A.C. No. 7314, August 25, 2015 - MARY ANN T. FLORES, new issue about her failure to implead Toribio Oribello, Jr. despite being an
Complainant, v. ATTY. JOVENCIO LL. MAYOR, JR., Respondent.
indispensable party for being the alleged son of the late Toribio Oribello; that the
misjoinder or non-joinder of parties was not a ground for the dismissal of an action, and
· A.M. No. CA-12-26-P, August 17, 2015 - OFFICE OF THE COURT could be corrected by a proper amendment; that the petitioner could not successfully
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. ANA MARIE ABARENTOS, RECORDS
OFFICER IV, COURT OF APPEALS, CEBU CITY, Respondent. assail the decree of adoption by the Court of First Instance in Occidental Mindoro; that
unless such decree of adoption was properly annulled or set aside by a court of
· G.R. No. 206220, August 19, 2015 - LUIS UY, SUBSTITUTED BY competent jurisdiction, she could not be barred from enforcing her right as the adopted
LYDIA UY VELASQUEZ AND SHIRLEY UY MACARAIG, Petitioner, v.
SPOUSES JOSE LACSAMANA AND ROSAURA*
SUBSTITUTED BY CORAZON BUENA, Respondents.
MENDOZA, daughter of the late Toribio Oribello; and that the petition for review should be denied
for its utter lack of merit.chanrobleslaw
· G.R. No. 214865, August 19, 2015 - ROSVEE C. CELESTIAL,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. Ruling of the Court

· G.R. No. 201822, August 12, 2015 - MARINA PORT SERVICES,

The appeal is meritorious.chanrobleslaw
INC., Petitioner, v. AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE CORPORATION,
Respondent.

1.
· G.R. No. 202967, August 05, 2015 - ALICIA Y. LAUREL,
SUBSTITUTED BY HER SOLE HEIR AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE JUAN
MIGUEL Y. LAUREL, Petitioner, v. FERDINAND M. VARDELEON,
Respondent.
The CA correctly held that the validity of the adoption decree in favor of the
respondent should not be assailed in an action for partition
· G.R. No. 183869, August 03, 2015 - LEONARDO L. VILLALON,
Petitioner, v. RENATO E. LIRIO, Respondent.
The petitioner insists that the complaint for partition must be dismissed based on her
allegations that the adoption decree issued by the CFI, Branch II, of Occidental Mindoro
· G.R. No. 179751, August 05, 2015 - HERMINIA L. MENDOZA, IN
HER CAPACITY AS OIC OF THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF LUCENA CITY, was void; and that her attack against the adoption decree was akin to the counterclaim
Petitioner, v. SPOUSES ARMANDO AND ANGELA GARANA AND FAR
EAST BANK & TRUST CO., INC., Respondents. allowed in Heirs of Simplicio Santiago v. Heirs of Mariano E. Santiago,14 an action for
the nullification of a certificate of title, because the counterclaim constituted a direct
· G.R. No. 208320, August 19, 2015 - GRACE DAVID Y CESAR, attack on the title.
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 174542, August 03, 2015 - KAREN GO, Petitioner, v.

The petitioner's position is untenable.
LAMBERTO ECHAVEZ, Respondent.

In Pinausukan Seafood House, Roxas Boulevard, Inc. v. Far East Bank & Trust
· G.R. No. 196875, August 19, 2015 - TEDDY MARAVILLA,
Company (now Bank of the Philippine Island),15 the Court has traced the evolution of
Petitioner, v. JOSEPH RIOS, Respondent.

the action to annul the judgment or final order of the CFI, and, later on, of the RTC, and
· G.R. No. 205113, August 26, 2015 - HONORLITA ASCANO- has indicated the proper court with jurisdiction over the action, as
CUPINO AND FLAVIANA ASCANO-COLOCADO, Petitioners, v. PACIFIC
REHOUSE CORPORATION, Respondent. follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
 The remedy of annulment of judgment has been long authorized and
· G.R. No. 205823, August 17, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE sanctioned in the Philippines. In Banco Español-Filipino v. Palanca, of
PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. REGIE BREIS Y ALVARADO AND GARY
YUMOL Y TUAZON,* Appellants. 1918 vintage, the Court, through Justice Street, recognized that there were
only two remedies available under the rules of procedure in force at the
· G.R. No. 198643, August 19, 2015 - MARSMAN & COMPANY time to a party aggrieved by a decision of the Court of First Instance (CFI)
AND QUIRINO R. ILEDAN, Petitioners, v. ARTEMIO M. LIGO,
Respondent. that had already attained finality, namely: that under Sec. 113, Code of
Civil Procedure, which was akin to the petition for relief from judgment
· G.R. No. 214054, August 05, 2015 - NG MENG TAM, Petitioner,
under Rule 38, Rules of Court; and that under Sec. 513, Code of Civil
v. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, Respondent.

Procedure, which stipulated that the party aggrieved under a judgment

· A.M. No. P-11-2982 (Formerly O.C.A. IPI No. 08-2913-P), rendered by the CFI "upon default" and who had been "deprived of a
August 17, 2015 - FORMER JUDGE FERNANDO VIL PAMINTUAN,
Complainant, v. SALVADOR G. COMUYOG, JR., CLERK III, Respondent. hearing by fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence" and the CFI
had "finally adjourned so that no adequate remedy exists in that court"
· G.R. No. 187882, August 24, 2015 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL could "present his petition to the Supreme Court within sixty days after he
BANK, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES HIPPOCRATES AND MELANIE
PIMENTEL, Respondents. first learns of the rendition of such judgment, and not thereafter, setting
forth the facts and praying to have judgment set aside." It categorically
· G.R. No. 190984, August 19, 2015 - ACOMARIT ACOMARIT ruled out a mere motion filed for that purpose in the same action as a
LIMITED, PHILS., AND/OR HONGKONG, Petitioners, v. GOMER L.
DOTIMAS, Respondent. proper remedy.
· G.R. No. 170706, August 26, 2015 - PRUDENCIO CARANTO,
The jurisdiction over the action for the annulment of judgment had been
Petitioner, v. BERGESEN D.Y. PHILS. AND/OR BERGESEN D.Y. A.S.A.,
Respondents.
lodged in the CFI as a court of general jurisdiction on the basis that the
subject matter of the action was not capable of pecuniary estimation.
· G.R. No. 194617, August 05, 2015 - LA TONDEÑA, INC.,
Section 56, paragraph 1, of Act No. 136 (An Act providing for the
Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Respondent.

Organization of Courts in the Philippine Islands), effective on June 11,

· G.R. No. 206612, August 17, 2015 - TOYOTA ALABANG, INC., 1901, vested original jurisdiction in the CFI over "all civil actions in which
Petitioner, v. EDWIN GAMES, Respondent.
the subject of litigations is not capable of pecuniary estimation." The CFI
· G.R. No. 203142, August 26, 2015 - THE PHILIPPINE PORTS
retained its jurisdiction under Section 44(a) of Republic Act No. 296 (The
AUTHORITY (PPA), Petitioner, v. COALITION OF PPA OFFICERS AND
EMPLOYEES, REPRESENTED BY HECTOR E. MIOLE, ET AL.,
Judiciary Act of 1948), effective on June 17, 1948, which contained a
Respondents. similar provision vesting original jurisdiction in the CFI over "all civil
actions in which the subject of the litigation is not capable of pecuniary
· G.R. No. 182157, August 17, 2015 - ANLUD METAL RECYCLING
estimation."
CORPORATION, AS REPRESENTED BY ALFREDO A. DY, Petitioner, v.
JOAQUIN ANG, Respondent.

· A.C. No. 5161, August 25, 2015 - RE: IN THE MATTER OF THE
In the period under the regimes of Act No. 136 and Republic Act No. 296,
PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT OF ROLANDO S. TORRES AS A
MEMBER OF THE PHILIPPINE BAR.
the issues centered on which CFI, or branch thereof, had the jurisdiction
over the action for the annulment of judgment. It was held in Mas v.
· G.R. Nos. 191370-71, August 10, 2015 - RODOLFO BASILONIA,
Dumara-og that "the power to open, modify or vacate a judgment is not
LEODEGARIO CATALAN AND JOHN BASILONIA, Petitioners, v. HON.
DELANO F. VLLLARUZ, ACTING IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING
only possessed by, but is restricted to the court in which the judgment was
JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, ROXAS CITY, BRANCH 16,
AND DIXON ROBLETE, Respondents.
rendered." In J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. v. Torres, the Court declared that
"the jurisdiction to annul a judgment of a branch of the Court of First
· G.R. No. 165146, August 12, 2015 - SECURITIES AND Instance belongs solely to the very same branch which rendered the
EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND VERNETTE G. UMALI, Petitioners, v.
BAGUIO COUNTRY CLUB CORPORATION, Respondent.; G.R. N0. judgment." In Sterling Investment Corporation v. Ruiz, the Court
165209 - RAMON K. ILUSORIO AND ERLINDA K. ILUSORIO,
Petitioners, v. BAGUIO COUNTRY CLUB CORPORATION, Respondent. enjoined a branch of the CFI of Rizal from taking cognizance of an action
filed with it to annul the judgment of another branch of the same court.
· G.R. No. 203066, August 05, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RODELIO LLOBERA Y OFIZA,
Accused-Appellant.
In Dulap v. Court of Appeals, the Court observed that the philosophy
underlying the pronouncements in these cases was the policy of judicial
· G.R. No. 190892, August 17, 2015 - VICENTE H. MANULAT, JR.,
stability, as expressed in Dumara-og, to the end that the judgment of a
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

court of competent jurisdiction could not be interfered with by any court of

· G.R. No. 183370, August 17, 2015 - NATION PETROLEUM GAS, concurrent jurisdiction. Seeing that the pronouncements in Dumara-og,
INCORPORATED, NENA ANG, MARIO ANG, ALISON A. SY, GUILLERMO
G. SY, NELSON ANG, LUISA ANG, RENATO C. ANG, PAULINE T. ANG, J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and Sterling Investment confining the jurisdiction
RICKY C. ANG,1 AND MELINDA ANG, Petitioners, v. RIZAL
COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, SUBSTITUTED
PHILIPPINE ASSET GROWTH ONE, INC., Respondent.
BY to annul a judgment to the court or its branch rendering the judgment
would "practically amount to judicial legislation," the Court found the
· G.R. No. 213455, August 11, 2015 - JUAN PONCE ENRILE,
occasion to re-examine the pronouncements. Observing that the plaintiffs
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, HON. AMPARO M.
CABOTAJE-TANG, HON. SAMUEL R. MARTIRES, AND HON. ALEX L.
cause of action in an action to annul the judgment of a court "springs from
QUIROZ OF THE THIRD DIVISION OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN,
Respondents.
the alleged nullity of the judgment based on one ground or another,
particularly fraud, which fact affords the plaintiff a right to judicial
· G.R. No. 201405, August 24, 2015 - LIWAYWAY ANDRES, interference in his behalf," and that that the two cases were distinct and
RONNIE ANDRES, AND PABLO B. FRANCISCO, Petitioners, v. STA.
LUCIA REALTY & DEVELOPMENT, INCORPORATED, Respondent. separate from each other because "the cause of action (to annul judgment)
is entirely different from that in the action which gave rise to the judgment
· G.R. No. 153810, August 12, 2015 - WINSTON R. GARCIA, IN sought to be annulled, for a direct attack against a final and executory
HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT AND GENERAL MANAGER OF THE
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM (GSIS), Petitioners, v.
ANGELITA TOLENTINO, EDELITO ZOLLO EDRALINDA, KATHLYN A.
judgment is not incidental to, but is the main object of, the proceeding,"
UMALI, VIVIAN ROSIELLE CERVANTES, EDITH MEDINA, ROMELO
CABANGON, ET AL., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 167297 - MELINA I. the Court concluded that "there is no plausible reason why the venue of the
GARCIA, CECILIA V. LAS, NIMFA PENALOSA, ROSANA R. ZEPEDA,
RACHELLE L. JACOB, MARIBEL B. TENA, AND EDUVIGIS S. ANGELES
(IN LIEU OF ANGELITA TOLENTINO FOR THE NATIONAL
action to annul the judgment should necessarily follow the venue of the
FORESTATION DEVELOPMENT OFFICE-DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES, ET AL.), Petitioners, v.
previous action" if the outcome was not only to violate the existing rule on
WINSTON GARCIA, ET AL., Respondents.
venue for personal actions but also to limit the opportunity for the
application of such rule on venue for personal actions. The Court observed
· G.R. No. 192943, August 12, 2015 - UNITED DUMANGAS PORT
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE PORTS that the doctrine under Dumara-og, J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and Sterling
AUTHORITY, ATTY. OSMAR M. SEVILLA, GENERAL MANAGER, ATTY.
FERNANDO B. CLAVERINA, PORT MANAGER, PORT MANAGEMENT Investment could then very well "result in the difficulties precisely sought
OFFICER-ILOILO; AND RAUL T. SANTOS, PORT DISTRICT MANAGER,
PORT DISTRICT OFFICE-VISAYAS, Respondents. to be avoided by the rules; for it could be that at the time of the filing of the
second action for annulment, neither the plaintiff nor the defendant
· G.R. No. 200114, August 24, 2015 - SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM,
resides in the same place where either or both of them did when the first
Petitioner, v. DEBBIE UBAÑA, Respondent.
action was commenced and tried," thus unduly depriving the parties of the
· G.R. No. 177168, August 03, 2015 - NAVY OFFICERS' VILLAGE right expressly given them by the Rules of Court "to change or transfer
ASSOCIATION, INC. (NOVAI),
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE
venue from one province to another by written agreement - a right
conferred upon them for their own convenience and to minimize their
· G.R. No. 163598, August 12, 2015 - AGRARIAN REFORM expenses in the litigation - and renders innocuous the provision on waiver
BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION (ARBA), AS REPRESENTED BY ISAIAS
"ACE" NICOLAS IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDENT, VIOLETA of improper venue in Section 4 (of Rule 4 of the Revised Rules of Court)."
BATADHAY, JESUS F. DANAO, DOMINADOR RIOSA, EVA I. FLORIDO,
VIRGINIA CARIAS, WILLIAM D. DORONELA, ELSA MENGOLIO,
FEDELINA AMENGYAO, REBECCA REBAMBA, MELANI CADAG,
The Court eventually ruled:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
SOFRONIA SABORDO, MYRNA SANTIAGO, JOSELYNDA MANALANZAN,
NORA I. REBUZANO, NATIVIDAD PLACIDO, ALGERICO L. GAEGUERA,
Our conclusion must therefore be that a court of first
RUBEN G. ACEBEDO, MARGIE M. VALDEZ, HELEN S. BUNI, EMELINDA
FERNANDEZ, JULIETA J. AVENGONZA, VIOLETA C. ASIS, CARINA C. instance or a branch thereof has the authority and
CABRERA, EDUARDO M. DILAY, SIMEONA V. ROLEDA, EVELYN SANTO
ELEUTERIA A. NOLASCO, TERESA CRUZ, MELBA ABRENICA, BESAME jurisdiction to take cognizance of, and to act in, a suit to
VILLACORTA, ROSALINA HERNANDEZ, VERONICA DOMULOT, LUCIA
SOUN, ILUMENADA RONQUILLO, REGINA LOPEZ, AMPARO GREY,
HIPOLITO MANDAO, JUAN DELA VEGA, PRESCILIANA LLEMIT,
annul a final and executory judgment or order rendered by
LEBERETA IGNACIO, FRANCISCO VALDEMOR, Petitioners, v. FIL-
ESTATE INC., PROPERTIES, Respondent.; G.R. NO. 164660 - THE
another court of first instance or by another branch of the
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD
(DARAB), AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES, INC., ET AL.,
same court. The policy of judicial stability, which underlies
Petitioners, v. KINGSVILLE CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
CORP. AND JOHNSON ONG, Respondents.; G.R. NO. 164779 - the doctrine laid down in the cases of Dumara-og, J.M.
AGRARIAN REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION (ARBA), VIOLETA
BATADHAY, NATIVIDAD PLACIDO, JESUS F. DANAO, EVA I. FLORIDO,
VIRGINIA CARIAS, WILLIAM D. DORONELA, ELSA MENGOLIO,
Tuason & Co., Inc. and Sterling Investment Corporation, et
ROBERTO ISIP, REBECCA REBAMBA, SOFRONIA SABORDO, MYRNA
SANTIAGO, JOSELYNDA MANALANZAN, NORA I. REBUZANO,
al., supra, should be held subordinate to an orderly
ALGERICO L. GALQUERA, RUBEN G. ACEBEDO, MARGIE M. VALDEZ,
HELEN S. BUNI, JULIETA J. AVENGONZA, VIOLETA C. ASIS, CARINA C.
administration of justice based on the existing rules of
CABRERA, EDUARDO M. DILAY, ELEUTERIA A. NOLASCO, TERESA
CRUZ, MELBA ABRENICA, VERONICA DOMULOT, LUCIA SUN, procedure and the law. x x xChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
ILUMENADA RONQUILLO AND PRESCILIANA LLEMIT, Petitioners, v.
KINGSVILLE CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND In 1981, the Legislature enacted Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 (Judiciary
JOHNSONONG, Respondent.
Reorganization Act of 1980). Among several innovations of this legislative
· G.R. No. 164974, August 05, 2015 - CHARLIE TE, Petitioner, v. enactment was the formal establishment of the annulment of a judgment
HON. AUGUSTO V. BREVA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE PRESIDING
JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, 11TH JUDICIAL REGION, or final order as an action independent from the generic classification of
BRANCH 10, DAVAO CITY; U R. BAHINTING, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
SPECIAL INVESTIGATOR OF THE NATIONAL BUREAU
INVESTIGATION, SARANGGANI DISTRICT OFFICE; AND PRYCE
OF litigations in which the subject matter was not capable of pecuniary
GASES, INC., Respondents. estimation, and expressly vested the exclusive original jurisdiction over
such action in the CA. The action in which the subject of the litigation was
· G.R. No. 211302, August 12, 2015 - PHILIPPINE TRANSMARINE
incapable of pecuniary estimation continued to be under the exclusive
CARRIERS, INC., CARLOS C. SALINAS, AND NORWEGIAN CREW
MANAGEMENT A/S, Petitioners, v. CESAR C. PELAGIO, Respondent.
original jurisdiction of the RTC, which replaced the CFI as the court of
general jurisdiction. Since then, the RTC no longer had jurisdiction over an
· G.R. No. 210164, August 18, 2015 - ROMMEL C. ARNADO,
action to annul the judgment of the RTC, eliminating all concerns about
Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND FLORANTE CAPITAN,
Respondents.
judicial stability. To implement this change, the Court introduced a new
procedure to govern the action to annul the judgment of the RTC in the
· G.R. No. 211649, August 12, 2015 - AQA GLOBAL
CONSTRUCTION, INC., Petitioner, v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK, 1997 revision of the Rules of Court under Rule 47, directing in Section 2
Respondent.; G.R. No. 211742 - JE-AN SUPREME BUILDERS AND
SALES CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK,
Respondent.
thereof that "[t]he annulment may be based only on the grounds of
extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction."
· G.R. No. 203355, August 18, 2015 - LEO R. ROSALES, EDGAR
SOLIS JONATHAN G. RANIOLA, LITO FELICIANO, RAYMUNDO DIDAL,
JR., NESTOR SALIN, ARNULFO S. ABRIL, RUBEN FLORES, DANTE
The Court has expounded on the nature of the remedy of annulment of
FERMA AND MELCHOR SELGA, Petitioners, v. NEW A.N.J.H.
ENTERPRISES & N.H. OIL MILL CORPORATION, NOEL AWAYAN, MA. judgment or final order in Dare Adventure Farm Corporation v. Court of
FE AWAYAN, BYRON ILAGAN, HEIDI A. ILAGAN AND AVELINO
AWAYAN, Respondents. Appeals, viz.:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
A petition for annulment of judgment is a remedy in equity
· A.M. No. RTJ-14-2383 (Formerly A.M. OCA I.P.I No. 05-2301- so exceptional in nature that it may be availed of only when
RTJ), August 17, 2015 - DR. CORAZON D. PADERANGA, DULCE P.
GUIBELONDO, PATRIA P. DIAZ, CARMENCITA P. ORSENO, AND DR.
AMOR P. GALON, Complainants, v. HONORABLE RUSTICO D.
other remedies are wanting, and only if the judgment, final
PADERANGA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 28, IN MAMBAJAO, CAMIGUIN,
order or final resolution sought to be annulled was rendered
Respondent.; A.M. No. RTJ-07-2033 (FORMERLY A.M. OCA I.P.I No.
06-2485-RTJ) - PATRIA PADERANGA DIAZ, Complainant, v. HON. RTC by a court lacking jurisdiction or through extrinsic fraud. Yet,
JUDGE RUSTICO D. PADERANGA, AS THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 28, IN MAMBAJAO, CAMIGUIN, the remedy, being exceptional in character, is not allowed to
Respondent.
be so easily and readily abused by parties aggrieved by the
· G.R. No. 160924, August 05, 2015 - TERELAY INVESTMENT AND
final judgments, orders or resolutions. The Court has thus
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. CECILIA TERESITA J.
YULO, Respondent.
instituted safeguards by limiting the grounds for the
annulment to lack of jurisdiction and extrinsic fraud, and by
· G.R. No. 213286, August 26, 2015 - MAMERTA LOPEZ CLAUDIO, prescribing in Section 1 of Rule 47 of the Rules of Court that
EDUARDO L. CLAUDIO, ASUNCION CLAUDIO-CONTEGINO, ANA
CLAUDIO-ISULAT, DOLORES CLAUDIO-MABINI, AND FERMIN L. the petitioner should show that the ordinary remedies of new
CLAUDIO, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES FEDERICO AND NORMA SARAZA,
Respondent. trial, appeal, petition for relief or other appropriate remedies
are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner. A
· G.R. No. 200295, August 19, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE petition for annulment that ignores or disregards any of the
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDGAR BOLO Y FRANCO, Accused-
Appellant. safeguards cannot prosper.
· G.R. No. 209331, August 24, 2015 - DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE,
The attitude of judicial reluctance towards the annulment of
REPRESENTED BY HON. CESAR V. PURISIMA IN HIS OFFICIAL
CAPACITY AS SECRETARY, AND THE BUREAU OF CUSTOMS,
REPRESENTED BY HON. ROZZANO RUFINO B. BIAZON, IN HIS
a judgment, final order or final resolution is understandable,
OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, Petitioners, v.
HON. MARINO M. DELA CRUZ, JR., IN HIS CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE for the remedy disregards the time-honored doctrine of
JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANILA, HON. FELICITAS O.
LARON-CACANINDIN, IN HER CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANILA, BRANCH 17, RONNIE C.
immutability and unalterability of final judgments, a solid
SILVESTRE, EDWARD P. DELA CUESTA, ROGEL C. GATCHALIAN,
IMELDA D.CRUZ, LILIBETH S. SANDAG, RAYMOND P. VENTURA, MA.
corner stone in the dispensation of justice by the courts. The
LIZA S. TORRES, ARNEL C. ALCARAZ, MA. LOURDES V. MANGAOANG,
FRANCIS AGUSTIN Y. ERPE, CARLOS T. SO, MARIETTA D.
doctrine of immutability and unalterability serves a two-fold
ZAMORANOS, CARMELITA M. TALUSAN,1] AREFILES H. CARREON,2]
AND ROMALINO G. VALDEZ, Respondents. purpose, namely: (a) to avoid delay in the administration of
justice and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the discharge
· A.C. No. 6738, August 12, 2015 - GABRIELA CORONEL, of judicial business; and (b) to put an end to judicial
Petitioner, v. ATTY. NELSON A. CUNANAN, Respondent.
controversies, at the risk of occasional errors, which is
· G.R. No. 170671, August 19, 2015 - FILADELFA T. LAUSA,
precisely why the courts exist. As to the first, a judgment that
LORETA T. TORRES, PRIMITIVO TUGOT AND ANACLETO T. CADUHAY,
Petitioners, v. MAURICIA QUILATON, RODRIGO Q. TUGOT,
has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable
PURIFICACION T. CODILLA, TEOFRA T. SADAYA, ESTRELLITA T.
GALEOS AND ROSITA T. LOPEZ, Respondents.
and is no longer to be modified in any respect even if the
modification is meant to correct an erroneous conclusion of
· G.R. No. 202322, August 19, 2015 - LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT fact or of law, and whether the modification is made by the
AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. ROMULO S. MENDOZA, FRANCISCO S.
MERCADO, ROBERTO M. REYES, EDGARDO CRISTOBAL, JR., AND court that rendered the decision or by the highest court of the
RODOLFO ROMAN, Respondents.
land. As to the latter, controversies cannot drag on
indefinitely because fundamental considerations of public
· G.R. No. 198751, August 19, 2015 - FLOR CAÑAS-MANUEL,
Petitioner, v. ANDRES D. EGANO, Respondent. policy and sound practice demand that the rights and
obligations of every litigant must not hang in suspense for an
· G.R. No. 181111, August 17, 2015 - JACKSON PADIERNOS Y indefinite period of time.ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
QUEJADA, JACKIE ROXAS Y GERMAN AND ROLANDO MESINA Y
JAVATE, Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. The objective of the remedy of annulment of judgment or final order is to
undo or set aside the judgment or final order, and thereby grant to the
· G.R. No. 202645, August 05, 2015 - FORTUNATO R. BARON,
petitioner an opportunity to prosecute his cause or to ventilate his defense.
MANOLO B. BERSABAL, AND RECTO A. MELENDRES, Petitioners, v. EPE
TRANSPORT, INC. AND/OR ERNESTO P. ENRIQUEZ, Respondents.
If the ground relied upon is lack of jurisdiction, the entire proceedings are
 set aside without prejudice to the original action being refiled in the proper
· G.R. No. 211263, August 05, 2015 - OKS DESIGNTECH, INC. court. If the judgment or final order or resolution is set aside on the
REPRESENTED BY ZAMBY O. PONGAD, Petitioner, v. MARY JAYNE L.
CACCAM, Respondent. ground of extrinsic fraud, the CA may on motion order the trial court to try
the case as if a timely motion for new trial had been granted therein. The
· G.R. No. 175098, August 26, 2015 - ISMAEL V. CRISOSTOMO, remedy is by no means an appeal whereby the correctness of the assailed
Petitioner, v. MARTIN P. VICTORIA, Respondent.
judgment or final order is in issue; hence, the CA is not called upon to
· A.M. No. CA-15-33-P [Formerly OCA IPI No. 13-207-CA-P],
address each error allegedly committed by the trial
August 24, 2015 - TERESITA R. MARIGOMEN, CLERK OF COURT,
COURT OF APPEALS, MANILA, Complainant, v. RONELO G. LABAR,
court.ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
DRIVER, MAILING AND DELIVERY SECTION, COURT OF APPEALS,
CEBU STATION, Respondent. Based on the foregoing, the RTC did not have the jurisdiction to determine or to review
the validity of the decree of adoption issued by the erstwhile CFI of Occidental Mindoro
· G.R. No. 168157, August 19, 2015 - HILARIO P. SORIANO, by virtue of the equal rank and category between the RTC and the CFI. The proper court
Petitioner, v. DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON VICTOR C.
FERNANDEZ, FLORIZA A. BRIONES, GRAFT INVESTIGATION AND with jurisdiction to do so was the CA, which has been vested by Section 9 of Batas
PROSECUTION OFFICER II, DONNA B. PASCUAL, GRAFT
INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OFFICER II, AND ATTY. ADONIS
C. CLEOFE, Respondents.
Pambansa Blg. 12916 with the exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for the
annulment of the judgments of the RTC, to wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
· G.R. No. 200841-42, August 26, 2015 - CE LUZON GEOTHERMAL
Sec. 9. Jurisdiction. - The [Court of Appeals] shall exercise:
POWER COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, Respondent.

x x x x
· G.R. No. 171582, August 19, 2015 - ALBERTO T. LASALA,
PREVIOUSLY DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE STYLE PSF SECURITY
AGENCY, Petitioner, v. THE NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY, (2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments
Respondent.
of Regional Trial Courts; and
· G.R. No. 169343, August 05, 2015 - SAN MIGUEL PROPERTIES,
INC., Petitioner, v. BF HOMES, INC., Respondent. x x x xChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Conformably with the foregoing, therefore, we join the CA's following exposition, to
· G.R. No. 166102, August 05, 2015 - MANILA ELECTRIC
wit:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
COMPANY, Petitioner, v. THE CITY ASSESSOR AND CITY TREASURER
OF LUCENA CITY, Respondents. Even supposing that the first adoption case suffers from infirmities, the
lower court is bereft of authority to annul the decree of adoption which was
· A.M. No. 99-7-01-SC, August 18, 2015 - RE: REQUEST OF
rendered by the CFI of Occidental Mindoro, a court of equal rank.
RETIRED SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICES FOR
INCREASE/ADJUSTMENT OF THEIR DECEMBER 1998 PENSIONS
Indeed, no court has the authority to nullify the judgments or
processes of another court of equal rank and category, having
· A.M. No. RTJ-15-2439 (Formerly: OCA I.P.I. No. 12-3989-RTJ),
August 26, 2015 - ARIEL "AGA" MUHLACH, Complainant, v. the equal power to grant the reliefs sought. Such power devolves
EXECUTIVE JUDGE MA. ANGELA ACOMPAÑADO-ARROYO, REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT, SAN JOSE CITY, CAMARINES SUR, Respondent. exclusively upon the proper appellate court. The raison d'etre for
the rule is to avoid conflict of power between different courts of
· G.R. No. 169385, August 26, 2015 - TEOFILO GIANGAN, equal or coordinate jurisdiction which would surely lead to
SANTOS BONTIA (DECEASED), AND LIBERATO DUMAIL (DECEASED),
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. confusion and seriously hinder the proper administration of
justice (Gallardo-Corro vs. Gallardo, 350 SCRA 568).17 (Emphasis
· G.R. No. 205722, August 19, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE
supplied)ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION
ON GOOD GOVERNMENT, Petitioners, v. LEGAL HEIRS OF JOSE L.
AFRICA, Respondents.
It is also relevant to mention that the judgment or final order of a court of law can be set
aside only through a direct attack commenced in the court of competent jurisdiction. For
· G.R. No. 169710, August 19, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE this reason, any attack in this action for partition against the validity of the adoption
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JOSE ALBERTO ALBA, REPRESENTED BY
HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, MANUEL C. BLANCO, JR., Respondent. decree issued by the CFI of Occidental Mindoro cannot be permitted because such would
constitute a collateral attack against the judgment in the adoption case.chanrobleslaw
· G.R. No. 162692, August 26, 2015 - NILO V. CHIPONGIAN,
Petitioner, v. VICTORIA BENITEZ-LIRIO, FEODOR BENITEZ AGUILAR,
AND THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents. 2.

· G.R. No. 206032, August 19, 2015 - JOSE RUDY L. BAUTISTA, The respondent did not discharge her burden of proof as the plaintiff to
Petitioner, v. ELBURG SHIPMANAGEMENT PHILIPPINES, INC.,
AUGUSTEA SHIPMANAGEMENT ITALY, AND/OR CAPTAIN ANTONIO S.
NOMBRADO, Respondents.
show that she was entitled to the partition

· G.R. No. 208354, August 26, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE

Even as we uphold the CA's disquisition on forbidding the RTC's interference with the
PHILIPPINES,
Appellant.
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO BACUS, Accused-
CFI's decree of adoption, we must reverse that part of the decision vacating and setting
aside the judgment rendered by the RTC on March 30, 1998. It is our studied conclusion
· G.R. No. 168258, August 17, 2015 - RICARDO V. QUINTOS, that the RTC correctly ruled against the right of respondent Remedios Oribello to
Petitioner, v. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Respondents.
PHILIPPINES AND
demand the partition of the real property belonging to the late Tomas Oribello on the
ground that she had not substantiated her right to the partition by preponderance of
· G.R. No. 181111, August 17, 2015 - JACKSON PADIERNOS Y evidence.
QUEJADA, JACKIE ROXAS Y GERMAN AND ROLANDO MESINA Y
JAVATE, Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

Before going further, it is relevant to relive the nature of the remedy of judicial partition.
· G.R. No. 202645, August 05, 2015 - FORTUNATO R. BARON,
The proceeding under Rule 69 of the Rules of Court is a judicial controversy between
MANOLO B. BERSABAL, AND RECTO A. MELENDRES, Petitioners, v. EPE
TRANSPORT, INC. AND/OR ERNESTO P. ENRIQUEZ, Respondents.
persons who, being co-owners or coparceners of common property, seek to secure a
division or partition thereof among themselves, giving to each one of them the part
· G.R. No. 175098, August 26, 2015 - ISMAEL V. CRISOSTOMO,
corresponding to him.18 The object of partition is to enable those who own property as
Petitioner, v. MARTIN P. VICTORIA, Respondent.
 joint tenants, or coparceners, or tenants in common to put an end to the joint tenancy so
· G.R. No. 211263, August 05, 2015 - OKS DESIGNTECH, INC. as to vest in each a sole estate in specific property or an allotment in the lands or
REPRESENTED BY ZAMBY O. PONGAD, Petitioner, v. MARY JAYNE L.
CACCAM, Respondent. tenements.19 According to American jurisprudence:20
The right of compulsory partition, in the case of coparceners was the gift of
· A.M. No. CA-15-33-P [Formerly OCA IPI No. 13-207-CA-P], the common law, but in the case of joint tenants and tenants in common it
August 24, 2015 - TERESITA R. MARIGOMEN, CLERK OF COURT,
COURT OF APPEALS, MANILA, Complainant, v. RONELO G. LABAR,
DRIVER, MAILING AND DELIVERY SECTION, COURT OF APPEALS,
was first given by statutes. The common law, having established this right
CEBU STATION, Respondent.
in favor of coparceners, because their relationship being created by it, and
not by an act or choice of their own, as in the case of joint tenants and
· G.R. No. 168157, August 19, 2015 - HILARIO P. SORIANO,
tenants in common, thought it reasonable that it should endure no longer
Petitioner, v. DEPUTY OMBUDSMAN FOR LUZON VICTOR C.
FERNANDEZ, FLORIZA A. BRIONES, GRAFT INVESTIGATION AND
PROSECUTION OFFICER II, DONNA B. PASCUAL, GRAFT than the parties should be pleased with it; but at the same time deemed it
INVESTIGATION AND PROSECUTION OFFICER II, AND ATTY. ADONIS
C. CLEOFE, Respondents. expedient as well as just, that they should not be placed in worse condition
by the partition, than if they had continued to enjoy their respective
· G.R. No. 200841-42, August 26, 2015 - CE LUZON GEOTHERMAL
interests in the lands or property without a division. x x x [T]herefore, after
POWER COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, Respondent.
the partition a warranty was annexed by the common law to each part, so
that, if any one should be impleaded, she might vouch her sisters, or those
· G.R. No. 171582, August 19, 2015 - ALBERTO T. LASALA,
who had been her coparceners at the time of the partition, or their heirs,
PREVIOUSLY DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE STYLE PSF SECURITY
AGENCY, Petitioner,
Respondent.
v. THE NATIONAL FOOD AUTHORITY,
and by this means also have their aid to deraign the warranty paramount,
if any existed, annexed to the purchase of their ancestor. (citations
· G.R. No. 169343, August 05, 2015 - SAN MIGUEL PROPERTIES, omitted)ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
INC., Petitioner, v. BF HOMES, INC., Respondent.
To accord with the nature of the remedy of judicial partition, there are two stages
· G.R. No. 166102, August 05, 2015 - MANILA ELECTRIC
defined under Rule 69 of the Rules of Court. The first relates to the determination of the
COMPANY, Petitioner, v. THE CITY ASSESSOR AND CITY TREASURER
OF LUCENA CITY, Respondents.
rights of the parties to the property held in common. The second concerns the physical
segregation of each party's just share in the property held in common. The second stage
· A.M. No. RTJ-15-2439 (Formerly: OCA I.P.I. No. 12-3989-RTJ),
need not be gone into should the parties agree on the physical partition. As Justice
August 26, 2015 - ARIEL "AGA" MUHLACH, Complainant, v.
EXECUTIVE JUDGE MA. ANGELA ACOMPAÑADO-ARROYO, REGIONAL
Regalado discussed in De Mesa v. Court of Appeals:21
TRIAL COURT, SAN JOSE CITY, CAMARINES SUR, Respondent.
The first stage of an action for judicial partition and/or accounting is
concerned with the determination of whether or not a co-ownership in fact
· A.M. No. 99-7-01-SC, August 18, 2015 - RE: REQUEST OF
exists and a partition is proper, that is, it is not otherwise legally
RETIRED SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS JUSTICES FOR
INCREASE/ADJUSTMENT OF THEIR DECEMBER 1998 PENSIONS
proscribed and may be made by voluntary agreement of all the parties
interested in the property. This phase may end in a declaration that
· G.R. No. 169385, August 26, 2015 - TEOFILO GIANGAN, plaintiff is not entitled to the desired partition either because a co-
SANTOS BONTIA (DECEASED), AND LIBERATO DUMAIL (DECEASED),
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. ownership does not exist or a partition is legally prohibited. It may also
end, on the other hand, with an adjudgment that a co-ownership does in
· G.R. No. 205722, August 19, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE truth exist, that partition is proper in the premises, and that an accounting
PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION
ON GOOD GOVERNMENT, Petitioners, v. LEGAL HEIRS OF JOSE L.
AFRICA, Respondents.
of rents and profits received by the defendant from the real estate in
question is in order. In the latter case, "the parties may, if they are able to
· G.R. No. 169710, August 19, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE
agree, make partition among themselves by proper instruments of
PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. JOSE ALBERTO ALBA, REPRESENTED BY
HIS ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, MANUEL C. BLANCO, JR., Respondent.
conveyance, and the court shall confirm the partition so agreed upon by all
the parties." In either case, whether the action is dismissed or partition
· G.R. No. 162692, August 26, 2015 - NILO V. CHIPONGIAN, and/or accounting is decreed, the order is a final one and may be appealed
Petitioner, v. VICTORIA BENITEZ-LIRIO, FEODOR BENITEZ AGUILAR,
AND THE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents. by any party aggrieved thereby.

· G.R. No. 206032, August 19, 2015 - JOSE RUDY L. BAUTISTA, The second stage commences when the parties are unable to agree upon
Petitioner, v. ELBURG SHIPMANAGEMENT PHILIPPINES, INC.,
AUGUSTEA SHIPMANAGEMENT ITALY, AND/OR CAPTAIN ANTONIO S. the partition ordered by the court. In that event, partition shall be effected
NOMBRADO,* Respondents.
for the parties by the court with the assistance of not more than three (3)
· G.R. No. 208354, August 26, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE
commissioners. This second phase may also deal with the rendition of the
PHILIPPINES,
Appellant.
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RICARDO BACUS, Accused- accounting itself and its approval by the Court after the parties have been
accorded the opportunity to be heard thereon, and an award for the
· G.R. No. 200751, August 17, 2015 - MONICO LIGTAS, recovery by the party or parties thereto entitled of their just shares in the
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
rents and profits of the real estate in question. Such an order is, to be sure,
also final and appealable.
· G.R. No. 168258, August 17, 2015 - RICARDO V. QUINTOS,
Petitioner, v. DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES AND
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Respondents.
In the decision ordering partition, the execution of that part of the
judgment which will not necessitate any further proceedings may be
· G.R. No. 215568, August 03, 2015 - RICHARD N. RIVERA,
Petitioner, v. GENESIS TRANSPORT SERVICE, INC. AND RIZA A. enforced. Further proceedings, such as the appointment of commissioners
MOISES, Respondents.
to carry out the partition and the rendition and approval of the accounting,
· G.R. No. 172301, August 19, 2015 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
may be had without prejudice to the execution of that part of the judgment
CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ASIAVEST MERCHANT
BANKERS (M) BERHAD, Respondent.
which needs no further proceedings. Thus, it has been held that execution
was entirely proper to enforce the defendant's obligation to render an
· G.R. No. 210554, August 05, 2015 - DAVID YU KIMTENG, MARY accounting and to exact payment of the money value of the plaintiffs'
L. YU, WINNIE L. YU, VIVIAN L. YU, ROSA GAN, LILIAN CHUA WOO
YUKIMTENG, SANTOS YU, MARCELO YU, AND SIN CHIAO YU LIM, shares in the personal property and attorney's fees due defendants, as well
Petitioners, v. ATTY. WALTER T. YOUNG, ANASTACIO E. REVILLA, JR.,
ATTY. JOVITO GAMBOL, AND ATTY. DAN REYNALD R. MAGAT,
PRACTICING LAW UNDER THE FIRM NAME, YOUNG REVILLA GAMBOL
as the costs of the suit and damages.ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
& MAGAT, AND JUDGE OFELIA L. CALO, PRESIDING JUDGE OF
BRANCH 211 OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANDALUYONG CITY,
In this case, the CA has declared that Remedios Oribello, being the adopted daughter of
Respondents.
the late Toribio Oribello, was entitled to the judicial partition she hereby demanded by
virtue of the decree of adoption of the CFI. Hence, it has remanded the case to the RTC
· G.R. No. 171804, August 05, 2015 - THE REGISTER OF DEEDS
OF NEGROS OCCIDENTAL AND THE NATIONAL TREASURER OF THE for the second stage of the partition proceedings.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, v. OSCAR ANGLO, SR.,
AND ANGLO AGRICULTURAL CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY OSCAR
ANGLO, JR., Respondents.
The declaration of the CA in favor of Remedios Oribello was factually unwarranted. As
· G.R. No. 205705, August 05, 2015 - DOMINADOR M. APIQUE,
the plaintiff, she had the burden of proof, as the party demanding the partition of
Petitioner, v. EVANGELINE APIQUE FAHNENSTICH, Respondent. property, to establish her right to a share in the property by preponderance of evidence,
but she failed to provide the factual basis of her right to the partition warranted the
· G.R. No. 195990, August 05, 2015 - HEIRS OF RAFAEL GOZO
dismissal of her claim for judicial partition.
REPRESENTED BY CASTILLO GOZO AND RAFAEL GOZO, JR.,
Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE UNION MISSION CORPORATION OF THE
SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH (PUMCO), SOUTH PHILIPPINE
UNION MISSION OF SDA (SPUMCO) AND SEVENTH DAY ADVENTIST
CHURCH AT SIMPAK, LALA, LANAO DEL NORTE REPRESENTED BY In its assailed judgment, the RTC found that Remedios Oribello did not satisfactorily
BETTY PEREZ , Respondents.
establish her co-ownership of the properties left by the late Toribio Oribello, cogently
· G.R. No. 163504, August 05, 2015 - BERLINDA ORIBELLO,
observing as follows:chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS (SPECIAL FORMER
DIVISION), AND REMEDIOS ORIBELLO, Respondents.
TENTH The combination of all those stated above prods this Court to conclude
that Toribio Oribello did not testify in the court hearing of February 18,
1974 in Special Proceeding No. R-94. As per record of the case, it was a
certain Toribio Orivillo who testified on that date. In the earlier part of this
Decision (page 12), this Court made the pronouncement that the
names Toribio Orivillo, used in Special Proceeding No. R-94, and Toribio
Oribello, used in Special Proceeding No. R-274, refer to the same person.
Both names refer to the same person as they were meant to refer to the
same physical person, but the physical person who physically appeared
and actually testified before the Court of First Instance in San Jose,
Occidental Mindoro on February 18, 1974 was not Toribio Oribello but
one Toribio Orivillo or purporting to be one Toribio Orivillo, a person
physically different from the physical Toribio Oribcllo. There are several
reasons why. According to Atty. Jaravata, the spouses Orivillo were in a
hurry to go back to the United States (TSN, November 17, 1997, page 6)
which explained the reason why they were not able to sign the petition for
adoption. The petition (Exhibit "J") is a one-page petition, typed double-
spaced. It is accompanied by a one-page affidavit of consent to adoption
executed by natural parents Alfredo Selga and Amada Selga, also typed
double-spaced. This one-page petition could be prepared within five
minutes. It would not take ten minutes to prepare this one-page petition
assuming the typist is a slow one. If spouses Orivillo were in a hurry to go
back to the United States, a delay of ten minutes will not make much
difference considering the fact that they were still in the offices of Atty.
Jaravata in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro. They were not in the airport
about to take their flight to the United States. The second reason is that if
both spouses were really there, they could have corrected the spelling of
the surname, from Orivillo to Oribello. The third reason is that only one
month separated the filing of the petition and its hearing. It would not be
economical for the would-be-adopter, who was not shown to have been
very rich but merely a sugar worker, to go to the United States in a hurry
and then come back here in the Philippines within a period of just thirty
(30) days, who, upon facts established in this case, did not show much
interest in exercising parental authority over the supposedly-adopted
child. She remained in Occidental Mindoro. If this Toribio Orivillo was
portrayed as being an eager-beaver childless parent in coming back here in
the Philippines within thirty days from departing the country in a hurry for
the purpose of testifying in our court of law so that he could adopt said
Remedios Selga and have the experience of exercising parental authority,
the facts established in this case show that such portrayal was misleading
and untruthful in that he never showed interest to such adoption. Neither
did he show interest or anxiety over that child, Remedios Selga. The
explanation of Atty. Ernesto Jaravata that they were in a hurry to go back
to the United States was merely to justify the absence of the signatures of
both spouses in the one-page petition. Fourth, in the hearing of February
18, 1974, if the real Toribio Oribello appeared in Court, he would
have corrected his surname and he would have stated his citizenship. It
would be unnatural for a person not to react when his surname is
misspelled. Also, his citizenship was not stated just like in the petition. It is
required in adoption cases to state the citizenship of the adopter because
there are legal requirements to satisfy in case of a foreigner adopting a
Filipino citizen.

The petitioner Toribio Orivillo who testified in Special Proceeding No. R-

94 was not the real Toribio Oribello who was born on April 16, 1910 in
Agoo, La Union and who died on August 18, 1993 in Agoo, La
Union. Somebody with the name Toribio Orivillo or purporting to be such
stood for him and testified for him in the then Court of First Instance
based in San Jose, Occidental Mindoro on February 18, 1974.

As plaintiffs natural father said, Toribio Oribello did not know about the
second adoption case (TSN, January 14, 1998, page 22).

This Court concludes now without an iota of doubt that Toribio Oribello
did not know also about the first adoption case (Special Proceeding No. R-
94) just like the second one (Special Proceeding No. R-274). While the
second part of the Rule on res inter alios acta states that evidence that one
did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove that
he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time, it may be
received to prove a specific intent, plan or scheme. Under the
circumstances, these were machinations orchestrated by Alfredo Selga as
he himself expressly admitted with respect to the second adoption case.

This case is an action for judicial partition. As stated by the Supreme Court
 in the case of Municipality of Biñan v. Garcia, December 22, 1989, a
judicial partition has two phases. The first phase is an inquiry as to
whether there exists co-ownership of properties by several persons. The
second phase is on the actual partition and accounting, if applicable.

This Court finds that no-co-ownership exists between plaintiff and

defendant. Hence, we cannot proceed to the second
22
phase. ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
The foregoing findings by the RTC, that the Tomas Orivillo who had legally adopted
Remedios Oribello under the CFI's decree of adoption was not the same person as
the Tomas Oribello whose property was the subject of her demand for judicial
partition, were supported by the records. In finding so, the RTC did not interfere with
the jurisdiction of the CFI as a court of equal rank and category, and did not negate the
adoption decree, but simply determined whether or not the claim of Remedios Oribello
to the partition of the property of Tomas Oribello was competently substantiated by
preponderance of evidence. What the RTC thereby settled was only whether Remedios
Oribello was a co-owner of the property with Berlinda Oribello, the widow of Tomas
Oribello. The RTC, being the trial court with jurisdiction over the action for partition,
undeniably possessed the fullest authority to hear and settle the conflicting claims of the
parties.

WHEREFORE, the Court REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the Decision promulgated
on July 31, 2003 by the Court of Appeals; REINSTATES the Judgment of the Regional
Trial Court rendered on March 30, 1998 dismissing Civil Case No. A-1757
entitled Remedios Oribello, represented by her Atty.-in-Fact Alfredo Selga v. Berlinda
P. Oribello; and ORDERS respondent Remedios Oribello to pay the costs of suit.

SO ORDERED.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Sereno, C.J., Leonardo-De Castro, Perez, and Perlas-Bernabe, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:

1
Rollo, pp. 60-66; penned by Associate Justice Edgardo P. Cruz (retired),
with Associate Justice Portia Alino-Hormachuelos (retired) and Associate
Justice Noel G. Tijam concurring.
2
CA rollo, pp. 40-66.
3
Rollo, p. 66.
4
Id. at 60-61.
5
Id. at 61-62.
6
Id. at 62.
7
Supra note 1.
8
Supra note 3.
9
Rollo, p. 26.
10
Id. at 31.
11
Id. at 41.
12
Id. at 49.
13
Id. at 271-278.
14
G.R. No. 151440, June 17, 2003, 404 SCRA 193.
15
G.R. No. 159926, January 20, 2014, 714 SCRA 226.
16
The Judiciary Reorganization Ad of 1980.
17
Rollo, pp. 64-65.
18
Reyes v. Cordero, 108 Phil. 867 (1920).
19
Id.
20
31 Words and Phrases, 262, Partition, citing Weiser v. Weiser, 5 Watts
(Pa.) 279, 280-281, 30 Am. Dec. 313.
21
G.R. No. 109387, April 25, 1994, 231 SCRA 773, 780-781.
22
CA rollo, pp. 61-65.

Back to Home | Back to Main

QUICK SEARCH
1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED