Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1959 > March 1959 Decisions > G.R. No. L-12703 March 25, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMA ORPILLA-MOLINA

105 Phil 362:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-12703. March 25, 1959.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MAXIMA ORPILLA-MOLINA, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

Assistant Solicitor General Esmeraldo Umali and Solicitor Pacifico P. de Castro for appellant,

Pedro N. Laggui for Appellees.


SYLLABUS


1. CONTEMPT; JURISDICTION OF COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OVER CONTEMPT COMMITTED AGAINST INFERIOR JUDGE. — Although Republic Act 296 assigned to the justice of the peace courts all criminal offenses penalized with imprisonment for not more than six months or a fine not exceeding P200 or both, contempt committed against a justice of the peace court must be deemed not included in such assignment because under Sec. 4 of Rule 64, proceedings for such contempt "may be instituted" either in the court of first instance or in such justice of the peace court.

2. ID.; ID.; CONTEMPT CIVIL IN NATURE. --While the proceeding is penal in nature, this contempt constituted at bottom a civil contempt. And civil contempts are not among those ordinary criminal cases allotted to inferior courts by Republic Act 296.


D E C I S I O N


BENGZON, J.:


Before the court of first instance of Cagayan, the defendants Maxima Orpilla-Molina, Et Al., were charged with having committed indirect contempt of the justice of the peace court of Alcala, Cagayan, because they unlawfully re-entered the land from which they had been previously ejected by the sheriff in virtue of a final decision of said inferior court.

They raised the question of jurisdiction, pointing out that the punishment provided for such contempt in section 6 of the Rules of Court was a fine not exceeding P100 or imprisonment for not more than one month or both. Such penalty, they contended, fell beyond the original jurisdiction of courts of first instance.

Over the fiscal’s objection, the court sustained defendants’ contention and dismissed the complaint in its order of June 29, 1957.

Hence, this appeal, which we find to be meritorious. Although Republic Act 296 assigned to the justice of the peace courts all criminal offenses penalized with imprisonment for not more than six months or a fine not exceeding P200 or both, this case must be deemed not included in such assignment because under section 4 of Rule 64, proceedings for contempt committed against a justice of the peace court "may be instituted" either in the court of first instance or in such justice of the peace court.

Rule 64 is as much a law as Republic Act 296; and both should be construed and upheld together, if possible, by making the former an exception to the latter. Repeals are not favored, the authorities agree. Besides, this contempt constituted at bottom a civil contempt, as distinguished from a criminal one. 1 True, the proceeding is penal in nature as we have heretofore, held, 2; yet it would seem reasonable, considering their true purpose, 3 not to classify civil contempts among those ordinary criminal cases allotted to inferior courts by the Judiciary Act of 1948.

Upon further reflection it will be noted, in line with the Solicitor General’s observation, that adoption of appellees’ viewpoint would result in depriving courts of first instance of jurisdiction to punish direct contempts 4 against them, and of disabling them effectively to enforce their orders with the consequent loss of their inherent right of self-preservation, and their power to compel obedience to their commands. 5

Accordingly, the appealed order is hereby reversed and the record remanded to the court below for further proceedings. Costs against appellees.

Paras, C.J., Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J.B.L. and Endencia, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Phil. Railway Co. v. Judge of Iloilo, G. R. No. 44983, Moran, Rules of Court (1957 Ed.) 121.

2. Villanueva v. Lim, 69 Phil., 654; Pajao v. Provincial Board, 88 Phil., 588.

3. To benefit the adverse party. Phil. Railway, supra.

4. Fine of P200 or 10-day imprisonment or both. (Sec. 1, Rule 64)

5. Sec. 5, Rule 124.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1959 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-12163 March 4, 1959 - PAZ FORES v. IRENEO MIRANDA

    105 Phil 267

  • G.R. No. L-10460 March 11, 1959 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. JUANA B. VDA. DE DEL ROSARIO

    105 Phil 277

  • G.R. No. L-10611 March 13, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VIRGILIO DIVINAGRACIA

    105 Phil 281

  • G.R. No. L-11223 March 16, 1959 - PABLO C. VENTURA v. JUDGE NICASIO YATCO

    105 Phil 287

  • G.R. No. L-11596 March 16, 1959 - ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO. INC. v. ELEUTERIO LIMCACO, ET AL.

    105 Phil 295

  • G.R. No. L-11981 March 17, 1959 - CIRIACO SANTIAGO v. MANUEL CONDE

    105 Phil 298

  • G.R. No. L-11315 March 18, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUSTAQUIO HINAUT

    105 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. L-11741 March 18, 1959 - EL AHORRO INSULAR, ET AL. v. VICTORINO T. AQUINO

    105 Phil 307

  • G.R. No. L-14891 March 19, 1959 - ALFREDO B. SAULO v. PELAGIO CRUZ

    105 Phil 315

  • G.R. No. L-13204 March 20, 1959 - ENRIQUE C. SERVO v. MARIANO ALCANABA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 322

  • G.R. No. L-9724 March 23, 1959 - TOMAS B. BERVA v. THE CITY MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER OF NAGA CITY

    105 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. L-12343 March 23, 1959 - LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY v. ALFONSO LOPEZ

    105 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. L-12497 March 23, 1959 - PRIMITIVO A. MACARAIG v. VICENTE DY SUN

    105 Phil 332

  • G.R. No. L-12695 March 23, 1959 - CITY OF ILOILO v. REMEDIOS SIAN VILLANUEVA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. L-12698 March 23, 1959 - PHIL. NATIONAL BANK v. PHIL. SURETY & INSURANCE COMPANY

    105 Phil 344

  • G.R. Nos. 11928-11930 March 24, 1959 - VEDASTO JESALVA, ET AL. v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 348

  • G.R. No. L-10883 March 25, 1959 - TERESA REALTY v. STATE CONSTRUCTION AND SUPPLY CO., ET AL.

    105 Phil 353

  • G.R. Nos. L- 12078-79 March 25, 1959 - MATIAS BELARMINO v. PANTALEON F. ALIHAN

    105 Phil 358

  • G.R. No. L-12703 March 25, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMA ORPILLA-MOLINA

    105 Phil 362

  • G.R. No. L-11472 March 30, 1959 - OBDULIA ARAGON, ET AL. v. FRANCISCO ARAGON, ET AL.

    105 Phil 365

  • G.R. No. L-11569 March 30, 1959 - ROGERIO GENDRALA v. TEOFISTO CORDOVA

    105 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. L-12729 March 30, 1959 - ARSENIO R. REYES v. MARCIAL DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    105 Phil 372

  • G.R. No. L-12944 March 30, 1959 - MARIA NATIVIDAD VDA. DE TAN v. VETERANS BACKPAY COMMISSION

    105 Phil 377

  • G.R. No. L-13298 March 30, 1959 - JOSE U. OCHATE v. DIEGO H. TY DELING, ET AL.

    105 Phil 384

  • G.R. No. L-7954 March 31, 1959 - B. A. CRUMB v. MARGARITO RODRIGUEZ

    105 Phil 391

  • G.R. No. L-10884 March 31, 1959 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. PHILIPPINE LEATHER CO. INC.

    105 Phil 400

  • G.R. No. L-11785 March 31, 1959 - GABINO BACHOCO v. IGNACIA ESPERANCILLA

    105 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. L-12064 March 31, 1959 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO ZURBANO

    105 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. L-12104 March 31, 1959 - CASIMIRO GARGANTA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    105 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. L-12128 March 31, 1959 - BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. ANTONIO NOBLEJAS

    105 Phil 418

  • G.R. No. L-12282 March 31, 1959 - BOARD OF DIRECTORS v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    105 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. L-12592 March 31, 1959 - TIBURCIO SOMERA, ET AL. v. AGRIPINO GALMAN, ET AL.

    105 Phil 431