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
 

   
May-1964 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-17812 May 20, 1964 - CIPRIANO DEFENSOR v. HON. RAMON BLANCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17212 May 23, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LT. ALCANTARA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18763-64 May 23, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN MARTIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19562 May 23, 1964 - JOSE SERRANO v. LUIS SERRANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16217 May 25, 1964 - ALFONSO DE LOS REYES, ET AL. v. LUIS DE LEON

  • G.R. No. L-18783 May 25, 1964 - GENEROSO BAJE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18978 May 25, 1964 - MANUEL MORATA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19273-74 May 25, 1964 - STA. CECILIA SAWMILLS, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19273-74 May 25, 1964 - STA.CECILIA SAWMILLS, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-19566 May 25, 1964 - REMELA ZALDARRIAGA, ET AL. v. ENRIQUE F. MARIÑO

  • G.R. No. L-19756 May 25, 1964 - ALEJANDRA ESQUIVEL-CABATIT, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19849 May 25, 1964 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. OLIMPIO LIMLINGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-20614 and L-21517 May 25, 1964 - PHIL. RABBIT BUS LINES, INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15998 May 26, 1964 - GUILLERMO ANTONIO IVANOVICH v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18079 May 26, 1964 - MACONDRAY & CO., INC. v. BERNARDO S. DUNGAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18264 May 26, 1964 - MANILA RAILROAD CO. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMM., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15308 May 29, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO BOYLES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16086 May 29, 1964 - M. RUIZ HIGHWAY TRANSIT, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16857 May 29, 1964 - MARCELO CASTILLO, JR., ET AL. v. MACARIA PASCO

  • G.R. No. L-17639 May 29, 1964 - CESAR PABLO OBESO BEDUYA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18203 May 29, 1964 - MANUEL DE LARA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18282 May 29, 1964 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PRISCILA ESTATE, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18450 May 29, 1964 - LU DO, ET AL. v. PHIL. LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18777 May 29, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO CONDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18808 May 29, 1964 - ACE PUBLICATION, INC. v. COMM. OF CUSTOMS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19060 May 20, 1964 - IGNACIO GERONA, ET AL. v. CARMEN DE GUZMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19252 May 29, 1964 - TUMIPUS MANGAYAO, ET AL. v. QUINTANA LASUD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19265 May 29, 1964 - MOISES SAN DIEGO, SR. v. ADELO NOMBRE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19555 May 29, 1964 - MATEO DE RAMAS v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22193 May 29, 1964 - LAGUNA TAYABAS BUS CO. v. JULIETA CORNISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-22696 May 29, 1964 - COMM. OF IMMIGRATION v. HON. F. FERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-10774 May 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. OSCAR CASTELO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-6025 & L-6026 May 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMADO V. HERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15056 May 30, 1964 - M. S. GALUTERA v. MAERSK LINE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16315 May 30, 1964 - COMM. OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. HAWAIIAN-PHILIPPINE COMPANY

  • G.R. No. L-16547 May 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MODESTO ANTONIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16569 May 30, 1964 - PHIL. ENGINEERING CORP. v. AMADO FLORENTINO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16975 May 30, 1964 - IN RE: ROMULO QUA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-17774 May 30, 1964 - IN RE: CEFERINO GO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18476 May 30, 1964 - PHIL. LAND-AIR-SEA LABOR UNION, ET AL. v. SY INDONG CO. RICE & CORN MILL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18758 May 30, 1964 - DY PEK LONG v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. Nos. 18767 and L-18789-90 May 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MADRIGAL TORINO

  • G.R. No. L-19569 May 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORENZANA YUMANG

  • G.R. No. L-19749 May 30, 1964 - MONICO CRUZ v. CAMILO PANGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19773 May 30, 1964 - MANILA RAILROAD CO. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMM., ET AL.

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-19756   May 25, 1964 - ALEJANDRA ESQUIVEL-CABATIT, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-19756. May 25, 1964.]

    ALEJANDRA ESQUIVEL-CABATIT alias ALEJANDRA RALUTIN VDA. DE CABATIT, GERINO ESQUIVEL and ANTONINA CABATIT, Petitioners, v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS and BASILIO FERNANDEZ, Respondents.

    Alfredo Gava, for Petitioners.

    Rodrigo V. Fontelera for Respondents.


    SYLLABUS


    1. PLEADINGS AND PRACTICE; EFFECT ON PERIOD TO APPEAL OF NON-SERVICE OF COPY OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION ON ADVERSE PARTY. — Where the copy of the motion for reconsideration had not been served upon the adverse party, said motion could not be entertained, and, being considered non-existent, its filing did not interrupt the running of the period to appeal from the lower court’s decision which, accordingly became final and executory.


    D E C I S I O N


    CONCEPCION, J.:


    Petitioners seek the review by certiorari of a decision of the Court of Agrarian Relations in CAR Case No. 46-Z 60 thereof, entitled "Basilio Fernandez v. Alejandra Esquivel-Cabatit, alias Alejandra Ralutin Vda. de Cabatit, Gerino Esquivel and Antonina Cabatit", and the annulment of a writ, issued by said court, for the execution of said decision. Upon the posting of the requisite bond, this Court issued a writ of preliminary injunction restraining the lower court from executing the aforementioned decision.

    Alejandra Esquivel-Cabatit, alias Alejandra Ralutin Vda. de Cabatit, hereinafter referred to as Mrs. Cabatit, is the mother of Antonina Cabatit, who is married to Gerino Esquivel. Said CAR Case No. 46-Z ‘60 was instituted by Basilio Fernandez for the purpose of securing his reinstatement as Mrs. Cabatit’s alleged tenant on a land situated in Sitio Cabatuan, Simminublan, San Narciso, Zambales, from which he claimed to have been illegally ousted by Mrs. Cabatit and Mr. and Mrs. Esquivel and to recover attorney’s fees. In their answer, the Esquivels denied that main allegations of Fernandez and, asserting that he had never been their tenant, assailed the jurisdiction of the court over the subject-matter of the case, and set up a counterclaim for damages. Mrs. Cabatit did not file any answer to the complaint.

    In due course, the Court of Agrarian Relations rendered judgment on September 1, 1961, sentencing the Esquivels to reinstate Fernandez as tenant in the landholding in question and to pay him fifty (50) cavanes of palay, or its equivalent in cash, each year, beginning from the crop-year 1960-61, and dismissing the case as regards Mrs. Cabatit, as well as the counterclaim of the Esquivels. On March 2, 1962, Fernandez moved for the execution of said decision, which was granted in an order dated March 14, 1962. Hence, this petition for review by certiorari of Mrs. Cabatit and the Esquivels, hereinafter referred to collectively as the petitioners.

    The main issue for determination in this appeal is the validity of said order of execution of March 14, 1962, which was issued upon the theory that the decision of September 1, 1961, is already final and executory. The petitioners, however, maintain the contrary, upon the ground the copy of said decision was served upon them on October 9, 1961; that their counsel in the lower court having died prior thereto, they engaged the services of Atty. Alfredo Cava, who, on October 24, 1961, entered his appearance in this case as their new counsel and filed a motion for reconsideration of said decision; and that this motion has not, as yet, been acted upon by the lower court.

    The record shows, however, that when said motion was called for hearing on November 3, 1961 — the date set forth in the notice of hearing at the foot of the motion — the lower court issued an order of the same date, requiring Atty, Cava to submit proof of service of copy of said motion to the adverse party, and that, in view of his failure to submit such proof of service, the court issued, on March 14, 1962, the order appealed from, declaring that the motion for reconsideration should be deemed abandoned, that the decision in question had, accordingly, become final and executory, and that its execution was, consequently in order.

    Upon the other hand, petitioners maintain that they had not abandoned said motion for reconsideration, their failure to submit the proof of service required in the order of November 3, 1961, having been due to the fact that they had not received copy or notice of that order, for said copy or notice was sent by mail addressed to Atty. Cava at "5-i Palosapis, Quezon City", which was the address of said counsel, prior to October 31, 1961, although, on that date, he notified the Clerk of Court, in writing, that he had moved to 37 Hyacinth St., Roxas District, Quezon City.

    Regardless, however, of Atty. Cava’s correct address on November 3, 1961, we find no merit in this appeal, for petitioners’ motion for reconsideration shows, at the foot thereof, that copy of the motion had been sent by counsel to one Atty. Amado Evangelista, Olongapo, Zambales, as the supposed counsel for respondent Fernandez, although his true counsel of record is Atty. Rodrigo V. Fontelera. Inasmuch as copy of petitioners’ motion for reconsideration had not been served upon the adverse party, the motion could not be entertained (Rule 26, section 6, Rules of Court). In other words, the motion is considered non-existent (Manakil v. Revilla, 42 Phil. 81; Roman Catholic Bishop of Lipa v. Municipality of Unisan, 44 Phil. 866; Director of Lands v. Sanz, 45 Phil. 117; Philippine National Bank v. Santos Donasco, L-18638, February 28, 1963) and its filing did not interrupt the running of the period to appeal from the decision adverted to above, which, accordingly, became final and executory.

    WHEREFORE, the decision and the order appealed from are affirmed, and the writ of preliminary injunction issued by this Court hereby dissolved, with costs against petitioners herein. It is so ordered.chanrobles lawlibrary : rednad

    Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon and Makalintal, JJ., concur.

    Reyes, J.B.L. and Regala, JJ., took no part.

    G.R. No. L-19756   May 25, 1964 - ALEJANDRA ESQUIVEL-CABATIT, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.


    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