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
 

   
April-1955 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-7065 April 13, 1955 - TEOFILA S. TIBON v. AUDITOR GENERAL

    096 Phil 786

  • G.R. No. L-7784 April 13, 1955 - NICOLAS ADANTE v. CANDIDO DAGPIN

    096 Phil 789

  • G.R. No. L-7904 April 14, 1955 - EDUARDO HILVANO v. FIDEL FERNANDEZ

    096 Phil 791

  • G.R. No. L-7851 April 15, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HONORABLE JOSE P. VELUZ

    096 Phil 794

  • G.R. No. L-8183 April 15, 1955 - VICTOR DE LA CRUZ v. HONORABLE AMBROSIO T. DOLLETE

    096 Phil 797

  • G.R. No. L-8316 April 15, 1955 - LUZON STEVEDORING CO. v. THE HONORABLE CESAREO DE LEON

    096 Phil 801

  • G.R. No. L-7094 April 16, 1955 - JUANITA MIRANDA v. HON. JUDGE DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION

    096 Phil 805

  • G.R. No. L-7791 April 19, 1955 - LEE TAY & LEE CHAY v. KAISAHAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA KAHOY SA FILIPINAS

    096 Phil 808

  • G.R. No. L-6871 April 20, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. BANDALI TAGACAOLO

    096 Phil 812

  • G.R. No. L-7301 April 20, 1955 - TIU SAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. ET AL.

    096 Phil 817

  • G.R. No. L-7318 April 20, 1955 - HELEN GENIO DE CHAVEZ v. A. L. AMMEN TRANSPORTATION CO.

    096 Phil 823

  • G.R. No. L-6508 April 25, 1955 - KOPPEL (PHIL) INC. v. EL TRIBUNAL DE RELACIONES INDUSTRIALES

    096 Phil 830

  • G.R. No. L-7076 April 28, 1955 - ROSARIO and UNTALAN v. CARANDANG ET AL.

    096 Phil 845

  • G.R. No. L-6469 April 29, 1955 - NAVARRA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL and COURT OF APPEALS

    096 Phil 851

  • G.R. No. L-6740 April 29, 1955 - DIMAYUGA v. DIMAYUGA

    096 Phil 859

  • G.R. No. L-6752 April 29, 1955 - NAZARIO TRILLANA v. FAUSTINO MANANSALA

    096 Phil 865

  • G.R. No. L-6972 April 29, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO SATURNINO

    096 Phil 868

  • G.R. No. L-7054 April 29, 1955 - UY v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    096 Phil 871

  • G.R. No. L-7541 April 29, 1955 - VISAYAN SURETY & INS. CORP. v. LACSON ET AL.

    096 Phil 878

  • G.R. No. L-7550 April 29, 1955 - DONALD A. ROCCO v. MORTON MEADS

    096 Phil 884

  • G.R. No. L-7623 April 29, 1955 - FELICIDAD CASTAÑEDA v. BRUNA PESTAÑO

    096 Phil 890

  • G.R. No. L-7692 April 29, 1955 - PEOPLE’S BANK & TRUST CO., v. HONORABLE RAMON R. SAN JOSE

    096 Phil 895

  • G.R. No. L-8107 April 29, 1955 - VISAYAN SURETY & INS. CORP. v. HON. DE AQUINO ET AL.

    096 Phil 900

  • G.R. No. L-8348 April 29, 1955 - BAGTAS v. EL TRIBUNAL DE APELACION

    096 Phil 905

  • G.R. No. L-6931 April 30, 1955 - STANDARD-VACUUM OIL COMPANY v. M. D. ANTIGUA

    096 Phil 909

  • G.R. No. L-7236 April 30, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. Po GIOK TO

    096 Phil 913

  • G.R. No. L-7296 April 30, 1955 - PLASLU v. PORTLAND CEMENT CO., ET AL.

    096 Phil 920

  • G.R. No. L-7390 April 30, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYES, ET AL.

    096 Phil 927

  • G.R. No. L-7561 April 30, 1955 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISAAC, ET AL.

    096 Phil 931

  • G.R. No. L-7680 April 30, 1955 - TAN TONG v. DEPORTATION BOARD

    096 Phil 934

  • G.R. No. L-7830 Abril 30, 1955 - MANZA v. HON. VICENTE SANTIAGO, ET AL.

    096 Phil 938

  • G.R. No. L-8017 April 30, 1955 - MANSAL v. P. P. GOCHECO LUMBER CO.

    096 Phil 941

  • G.R. No. L-8278 April 30, 1955 - SUMAIL v. HON. JUDGE OF THE CFI OF COTABATO, ET AL

    096 Phil 946

  • G.R. No. L-8332 April 30, 1955 - JESUS S. RODRIGUEZ v. FRANCISCO A. ARELLANO

    096 Phil 954

  • G.R. No. L-8909 Abril 30, 1955 - JOSE LAANAN v. EL ALCAIDE PROVINCIAL DE RIZAL

    096 Phil 959

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-7094   April 16, 1955 - JUANITA MIRANDA v. HON. JUDGE DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION<br /><br />096 Phil 805

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-7094. April 16, 1955.]

    JUANITA MIRANDA, FILOMENA ALICDAN, LUISA OLIVEROS, LUCIANA EUGENIO, ILUMINADA ISLA, DIONISA SIDEÑO, CRISTETA RIVERA, ELISA MENDIOLA, SOCORRO FAJARDO, CONCHITA SAGUINSIN, VICENTE QUERI, VALENTIN SANTOS, EUGENIA QUERI, ISABEL VILLANUEVA, ENRIQUETA CRUZ, DOMINGO MACARIO and CLEMENTE, Petitioners, v. HON. JUDGE DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch I, ONG LIAN, NG PHO, CONRADO MACARO, and AMANDA JACINTO, Respondents.

    Antonio Barredo, for Petitioners.

    Ampil & Pronove, Alberto O. Villarosa, and Sotero H. Laurel for Respondents.


    SYLLABUS


    CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; SALE OF FRESH MEAT OUTSIDE PUBLIC MARKETS OF CITY OF MANILA PROHIBITED BY ORDINANCE NOS. 3563. — The validity and constitutionality of Ordinance No. 3563 of the City of Manila, prohibiting the sale of fresh meat outside the public markets having been upheld by the Supreme Court (Co Kiam v. City of Manila, L-6762), no license to sell fresh meat anywhere outside of the public markets shall be given by the city officers.


    D E C I S I O N


    BENGZON, J.:


    In June 1953, the respondents Ong Lian Et. Al. filed in the Court of First Instance of Manila, presided by the respondent judge, a petition to compel the Mayor of the City to issue to them licenses to sell fresh meat in their respective stores located within a radius of 200 meters from the Arranque Market, a public market of the City. (Civil Case No. 19844.)

    Ordinance No. 3563 prohibited the sale of fresh meat anywhere outside the public markets of the City. However, respondents Ong Lian Et. Al. contended that said ordinance was null and void and asked for appropriate remedies, they being fresh meat dealers outside of public markets who had been granted licenses in 1952 prior to the approval of Ordinance No. 3563. Respondents Ong Lian Et. Al. also applied for a preliminary mandatory injunction to require the Mayor to renew their licenses. There was another ordinance No. 3555, repealed by Ordinance No. 3563; and the City Fiscal, opposing Ong Lian’s petition invoked Ordinance No. 3555, supposing arguendo that Ordinance No. 3563 was void. Ordinance No. 3555 prohibited the sale of fresh meat within two hundred meters from the boundary of any public market in Manila. Ong Lian Et. Al. also maintained the proposition that Ordinance No. 3555 had no legal force.

    Advised that, in Civil Case No. 19227, entitled Co Kiam v. City of Manila, another judge of the same court had declared Ordinance No. 3563 null and void, and believing that Ordinance No. 3555, had ceased to operate as alleged by Ong Lian Et. Al., the respondent judge in an order dated June 18, 1953, required the officers of the city to renew their permits and licenses as meat dealers. Petitions to reconsider failed.

    Hence this action for certiorari instituted here by stall-holders and sellers of fresh meat in the Arrangue Market. Its purpose was to seek nullification of the writ of preliminary mandatory injunction issued by the respondent judge on June 18, 1953. Upon their request and after hearing both sides on oral argument this court issued on December 7, 1953 a writ of preliminary injunction to prevent the carrying out of respondent judge’s writ as aforesaid.

    Petitioners subsequently informed this Court that the respondent judge had decided the case on the merits, in favor of Ong Lian Et. Al., and had ordered on February 9, 1954, execution of his judgment pending appeal. Wherefore, a resolution was approved here on February 9, 1954 setting aside said order of February of the respondent judge, and ordering the latter "to desist from taking any other steps leading to the execution of the judgment rendered by him until further orders from this Court."

    About a month ago, on February 28, 1955, the validity and constitutionality of Ordinance No. 3563 was upheld in an opinion penned by Mr. Justice Alex Reyes deciding, on appeal, the same Civil Case No. 19227 of Manila, Co. Kiam v. City of Manila, hereinbefore mentioned (supra, p. 649). The motion to reconsider such decision was denied a few days ago.

    Which means that respondents Ong Lian Et. Al. may not be given licenses to sell fresh meat, inasmuch as Ordinance No. 3563 prohibits the sale of fresh meat anywhere outside of public markets of the City.

    Which also means that this Court’s resolution of February 9, 1954 requiring the respondent to desist from taking any other steps leading to the execution of his decision in the Civil Case No. 19844, Ong Lian Et. Al. v. Municipal Board of Manila Et. Al. should be and is hereby made permanent and absolute.

    The respondents, except the judge, will pay the costs of this litigation. So ordered.

    Pablo, Acting C. J., Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, and Reyes, J. B. L., JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. L-7094   April 16, 1955 - JUANITA MIRANDA v. HON. JUDGE DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION<br /><br />096 Phil 805


    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