ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 
 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
March-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-1720 March 4, 1950 - SIA SUAN, ET AL. v. RAMON ALCANTARA

    085 Phil 669

  • G.R. No. L-2038 March 4, 1950 - LUIS DEL CASTILLO v. METROPOLITAN INSURANCE COMPANY

    085 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-2171 March, 4, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. IDE LAGON RAMOS

    085 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-2407 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATIAS ALUPAY

    085 Phil 688

  • G.R. No. L-2447 March 4, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO PULIDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 695

  • G.R. No. L-1296 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PALICTE

    085 Phil 711

  • G.R. No. L-1546 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILS. v. RUFINO SURALTA

    085 Phil 714

  • G.R. No. L-2462 March 6, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GO LEE

    085 Phil 718

  • G.R. No. L-2665 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FLORENTINO PATERNO, ET AL

    085 Phil 722

  • G.R. No. L-2996 March 6, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PRECIANO MEJARES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 727

  • G.R. No. L-3463 March 6, 1950 - LEONCIO ROSARES v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 730

  • G.R. No. L-2335 March 7, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO MORENO

    085 Phil 731

  • G.R. No. L-3643 March 7, 950

    CARLOS C. ASPRA v. DIRECTOR OF PRISONS

    085 Phil 737

  • G.R. No. L-2269 March 14, 1950 - FABIAN B. S. ABELLERA v. NARCISO DE GUZMAN

    085 Phil 738

  • G.R. No. L-1990 March 15, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONILO GANAL, ET AL.

    085 Phil 743

  • G.R. No. L-2809 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRISCO HOLGADO

    085 Phil 752

  • G.R. No. L-3022 March 22, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO CABASA, ET AL

    085 Phil 758

  • G.R. No. L-3580 March 22, 1950 - CONRADO MELO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL

    085 Phil 766

  • G.R. No. L-2217 March 23, 1950 - MIGUEL R. CORNEJO v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    085 Phil 772

  • G.R. No. L-2582 March 23, 1950 - TRINIDAD SEMIRA, ET AL v. JUAN ENRIQUEZ

    085 Phil 776

  • G.R. No. L-2981 March 23, 1950 - VISAYAN SURETY & INSURANCE CORP. v. VICTORIA PASCUAL, ET AL

    085 Phil 779

  • G.R. No. L-2434 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MACABANTUG RANGON ET AL.

    085 Phil 786

  • G.R. No. L-2584 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO BARRAMEDA

    085 Phil 789

  • G.R. No. L-2636 March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS

    085 Phil 795

  • G.R. No. L-2784 March 25, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GERARDO NARSOLIS ET AL.

    085 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-2856 March 27, 1950 - GO CAM v. Hon. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN, ET AL

    085 Phil 802

  • G.R. No. L-2743 March 29, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIXTO CANDELARIA

    085 Phil 805

  • G.R. No. L-836 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANACLETO MAGDANG, ET AL

    085 Phil 807

  • G.R. No. L-1912 March 30, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. ANATOLIO LLENARIZAS

    085 Phil 809

  • G.R. No. L-2239 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AURELIO SANTIAGO

    085 Phil 813

  • G.R. No. L-2275 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SIMPLICIO MACASO, ET ALS.

    085 Phil 819

  • G.R. No. L-2288 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO MANOLONG

    085 Phil 829

  • G.R. No. L-2600 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO MARAPAO

    085 Phil 832

  • G.R. No. L-2647 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO S. SERRANO

    085 Phil 835

  • G.R. No. L-2681 March 30, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DARIO MARGEN, ET AL.

    085 Phil 839

  • G.R. No. L-2175 March 31, 1950 - NG GIOC LIU v. SECRETARY OF THE DFA

    085 Phil 842

  • G.R. No. L-2189 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CILDO, ET AL

    085 Phil 845

  • G.R. No. L-2318 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOFILO PAAR

    085 Phil 864

  • G.R. No. L-2405 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN DE LOS SANTOS

    085 Phil 870

  • G.R. No. L-2801 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRO BELANDRES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 874

  • G.R. No. L-2880 March 31, 1950 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEMETRIO MOSTOLES, ET AL.

    085 Phil 883

  •  




     
     

    G.R. No. L-2636   March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS<br /><br />085 Phil 795

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-2636. March 25, 1950.]

    YU SIP, Petitioner, v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, THE SHERIFF OF CALOOCAN, RIZAL, and VlCTORIA PASCUAL, Respondents.

    Pastor L. de Guzman for Petitioner.

    Teodoro R. Dominguez for Respondents.

    SYLLABUS


    1. CERTIORARI; DISMISSAL; QUESTIONS RAISED BECOME MOOT. — When the questions raised in a petition for a writ of certiorari have become moot, in view of the fact that the judgment therein rendered had been affirmed by the Court of Appeals and the writ of execution had been issued and carried out, and that the petitioner had no property with which to satisfy that part of the judgment awarding damages to the prevailing party, the petition should be dismissed.


    D E C I S I O N


    PADILLA, J.:


    The petitioner brought an action to replevy a truck described in the complaint, claiming to be the owner thereof. Upon the filing of a bond in the sum of P4,000, which is double the value of the truck, the sheriff took possession thereof and delivered it to the petitioner. In her answer to the complaint and in her third-party complaint against the petitioner, Ong Kiat Sing, and two guarantors of the latter, Victoria Pascual, one of the two defendants in the replevin case, alleged that she was the owner of the truck which she had leased to Ong Kiat Sing on 20 September 1946 for six months at P10 a day as rental; that the lessee sold it to the petitioner, the plaintiff in the replevin case, and for which sale the former was charged with and convicted of estafa with falsification of public document, and sentenced to suffer imprisonment, to pay a fine, and to indemnify Victoria Pascual in the sum of P2,300. After hearing in the replevin case, the Court declared the defendant and third-party plaintiff the owner of the truck; ordered the petitioner — the plaintiff in the replevin case — to return the truck, or, should the plaintiff be unable to return it, to pay P2,300, its value, to the defendant Victoria Pascual, and in either case, to pay P30 daily from 6 January 1947 to the date of the truck’s return or the payment of its full value; directed Ong Kiat Sing to pay P540, the rental of the truck from 1 November to 24 December 1946, and the two guarantors to pay the said sum should their principal Ong Kiat Sing fail to pay it, and costs. From this judgment the petitioner appealed. In the Court of Appeals, the appellee Victoria Pascual asked for the increase in the amount of the bond or for an additional bond of P30,000, alleging that the appeal was frivolous and for the purpose of delaying the execution of the judgment and of allowing the appellant to dispose of his property to defraud her, to which petition the appellant — the herein petitioner — objected. The Court of Appeals granted the petition of the appellee but in the sum of P10,000 only. As the appellant — the herein petitioner — failed to file the bond thus required within the period fixed by the Court of Appeals, the appellee moved for the execution of the judgment rendered in the case. The Court of Appeals granted the motion for execution "without prejudice to the appeal taking its course." A motion for reconsideration of the last resolution was denied.

    Petitioner seeks to annul the resolution of the Court of Appeals requiring him to file an additional bond for P10,000, and the one ordering the issuance of a writ of execution, at the instance of the appellee after the appellant, the herein petitioner, had failed to file the required bond within the period fixed by the Court, on the ground that the Court of Appeals had no authority to require the petitioner to increase the amount of the original bond for P4,000 or to file an additional bond for P10,000, and to order execution of the judgment upon failure of the petitioner to comply with the requirement; and that, even if the Court of Appeals had the power to make such requirement, it would constitute an excess of its jurisdiction or a grave abuse of discretion.

    The questions raised in the petition filed in this case have become moot, in view of the fact that the judgment in the replevin case had been affirmed by the Court of Appeals; that a writ of execution had been issued therein and pursuant thereto the sheriff seized the truck from the petitioner and delivered it to the respondent Victoria Pascual; and that the petitioner had no property with which to satisfy that part of the judgment awarding damages to the prevailing party.

    Petition dismissed, the writ of preliminary injunction dissolved, with costs against the petitioner.

    Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    Separate Opinions


    PADILLA, J.:


    I certify that Mr. Justice Torres voted for the dismissal of the petition.

    G.R. No. L-2636   March 25, 1950 - YU SIP v. COURT OF APPEALS<br /><br />085 Phil 795




    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED