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
 

   
September-2003 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. P-03-1705 September 2, 2003 - BALDOMERO DE VERA SOLIMAN, JR. v. PRINCESITO D. SORIANO

  • G.R. No. 138238 September 2, 2003 - EDUARDO BALITAOSAN v. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS

  • G.R. No. 146980 September 2, 2003 - LUZ E. TAGANAS, ET AL. v. MELITON G. EMUSLAN, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 3967 September 3, 2003 - ARTEMIO ENDAYA v. WILFREDO OCA

  • A.C. No. 6084 September 3, 2003 - FELICITAS BERBANO v. WENCESLAO BARCELONA

  • A.M. No. 02-10-614-RTC September 3, 2003 - RE: EDITORIAL OF THE NEGROS CHRONICLE AND OTHER CHARGES OF A CONCERNED CITIZEN AGAINST JUDGE ROGELIO CARAMPATAN

  • A.M. No. OCA-01-6 September 3, 2003 - DOMINADOR V. ASPIRAS v. ESMERALDA ABALOS

  • A.M. No. P-01-1466 September 3, 2003 - EDUARDO F. BAGO v. JOEL FERAREN

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1501 September 3, 2003 - ROMEO E. EJERCITO v. ILDEFONSO B. SUERTE

  • G.R. No. 131915 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDDIE LACHICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136274 September 3, 2003 - SUNFLOWER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139400 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAURICIO WATIWAT

  • G.R. No. 140652 September 3, 2003 - OLIVERIO LAPERAL v. PABLO V. OCAMPO

  • G.R. No. 144312 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CHUA TAN LEE

  • G.R. No. 145737 September 3, 2003 - CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. EVELYN P. CAYOBIT

  • G.R. No. 149617 September 3, 2003 - MARIANO JOAQUIN S. MACIAS v. MARGIE CORPUS MACIAS

  • G.R. No. 141527 September 4, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RANDY G. BOCALAN

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1788 September 5, 2003 - JORGE F. ABELLA v. FRANCISCO L. CALINGIN

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1430 September 8, 2003 - ROMEO B. SENSON v. HERIBERTO M. PANGILINAN

  • G.R. No. 128296 September 8, 2003 - NASIPIT LUMBER CO., ET AL. v. NATIONAL WAGES AND PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 152957 September 8, 2003 - FAUSTINO ESQUIVEL v. EDUARDO REYES

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1480 September 10, 2003 - TRINIDAD CABAHUG v. JASPER JESSE G. DACANAY

  • G.R. No. 91486 September 10, 2003 - ALBERTO G. PINLAC, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107271 September 10, 2003 - CITY OF CALOOCAN, ET AL. v. MAURO T. ALLARDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125329 September 10, 2003 - ANN BRIGITT LEONARDO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140762 September 10, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGER C. ROXAS

  • G.R. No. 148912 September 10, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TIMOTEO ESCARLOS

  • G.R. No. 151212 September 10, 2003 - TEN FORTY REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. MARINA CRUZ

  • A.M. No. P-02-1562 September 11, 2003 - ROMULO SG. VILLANUEVA v. CHARLIE C. LARCENA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-02-1742 September 11, 2003 - AVELINA MADULA v. RUTH CRUZ SANTOS

  • G.R. Nos. 136286-89 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN G. DE TAZA

  • G.R. No. 138366 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN CAÑETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138569 September 11, 2003 - CONSOLIDATED BANK and TRUST CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144785 September 11, 2003 - YOLANDA GARCIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 145407 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONITO HEREVESE

  • G.R. No. 151081 September 11, 2003 - TOP RATE CONSTRUCTION & GENERAL SERVICES v. PAXTON DEV’T. CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 153126 September 11, 2003 - MONTEREY FOODS CORP., ET AL. v. VICTORINO E. ESERJOSE

  • G.R. No. 153845 September 11, 2003 - EFREN P. SALVAN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1799 September 12, 2003 - MARIA CRISTINA OLONDRIZ PERTIERRA v. ALBERTO L. LERMA

  • G.R. No. 127206 September 12, 2003 - PERLA PALMA GIL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135029 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR CARRIAGA

  • G.R. No. 141600 September 12, 2003 - ROBERTO FULGENCIO, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144639 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENNY GO

  • G.R. Nos. 144972-73 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO JUNAS

  • G.R. No. 133365 September 16, 2003 - PLATINUM TOURS AND TRAVEL, INC. v. JOSE M. PANLILIO

  • G.R. Nos. 147814-15 September 16, 2003 - RAUL ZAPATOS v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 155278 September 16, 2003 - PRUDENCIO J. TANJUAN v. PHIL. POSTAL SAVINGS BANK

  • A.M. No. P-03-1740 September 17, 2003 - FRANKLIN Q. SUSA v. TEOFILA A. PEÑA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1656 September 17, 2003 - EDGARDO D. BALSAMO v. PEDRO L. SUAN

  • G.R. No. 141120 September 17, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FERNANDO BUENAVIDEZ

  • G.R. No. 146125 September 17, 2003 - NOVELTY PHIL., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-01-1347 September 18, 2003 - BENJAMIN TUDTUD v. MAMERTO Y. COLIFLORES

  • A.M. No. P-00-1370 September 18, 2003 - ALEJANDRO PAREDES, ET AL. v. JERRY MARCELINO

  • A.M. No. P-01-1510 September 18, 2003 - MARY ANN PADUGANAN-PEÑARANDA v. GRACE L. SONGCUYA

  • A.M. No. P-03-1691 September 18, 2003 - JOSE S. SAÑEZ v. CARLOS B. RABINA

  • A.M. No. P-03-1703 September 18, 2003 - EDNA FE F. AQUINO v. JOSE R. MARTIN

  • A.M. No. P-03-1724 September 18, 2003 - VICENTE ALVAREZ, Jr. v. JOSE R. MARTIN

  • A.M. No. P-03-1742 September 18, 2003 - SALVADOR L. BERNABE v. WINSTON T. EGUIA

  • G.R. No. 135559 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MORENO OCUMEN

  • G.R. No. 135563 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BOBBY P. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. No. 144913 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF PHIL. v. GERONIMO C. CENIZA

  • G.R. No. 149627 September 18, 2003 - KENNETH O. NADELA v. CITY OF CEBU, ET AL..

  • G.R. No. 152351 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JAMIL MALA

  • G.R. No. 152604 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONCIO S.PEDRIGAL

  • G.R. No. 153571 September 18, 2003 - BENGUET MANAGEMENT CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 156259 September 18, 2003 - GROGUN, INC. v. NAPOCOR

  • G.R. No. 157957 September 18, 2003 - CHARITO NAVAROSA v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142974 September 22, 2003 - SPS. SHEM G. ALFARERO and AURELIA TAGALOG v. SPS. PETRA and SANCHO SEVILLA

  • G.R. No. 152529 September 22, 2003 - SPS. HENDRIK and ALICIA S. BIESTERBOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1450 September 23, 2003 - RAMIRO S. DE JOYA v. AUGUSTUS C. DIAZ

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1509 September 23, 2003 - HELEN GAMBOA-MIJARES v. MANUEL Q. LIMSIACO, JR., ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-03-1732 September 23, 2003 - ROSENINA O. UY, ET AL. v. LOLITA R. EDILO

  • G.R. No. 123140 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BERNARDO CORTEZANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135446 September 23, 2003 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. BPI

  • G.R. No. 136729 September 23, 2003 - ASTRO ELECTRONICS CORP., ET AL. v. PHIL. EXPORT AND FOREIGN LOAN GUARANTEE CORP.

  • G.R. Nos. 138716-19 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PILLAS

  • G.R. No. 138725 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO OLIVAR

  • G.R. No. 139360 September 23, 2003 - HLC CONSTRUCTION AND DEV’T. CORP., ET AL. v. EHSHA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140982 September 23, 2003 - MARIO GUTIERREZ v. SINGER SEWING MACHINE COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 141434 September 23, 2003 - ANTONIO LO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143132 September 23, 2003 - VAN MELLE PHILS. ET AL. v. VICTOR M. ENDAYA

  • G.R. No. 144533 September 23, 2003 - JIMMY L. BARNES v. TERESITA C. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 146786-88 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANDRES T. DAÑO

  • G.R. No. 149295 September 23, 2003 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. GENEROSO DE JESUS

  • G.R. No. 149370 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARTIN ALEJO

  • G.R. No. 150905 September 23, 2003 - CITIBANK v. EFREN S. TEODORO

  • G.R. No. 151072 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE NATIVIDAD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 151931 September 23, 2003 - ANAMER SALAZAR v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 152823-24 September 23, 2003 - RUFINA CHUA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 152998 September 23, 2003 - SIMON Q. AÑONUEVO, JR., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 156295 September 23, 2003 - MARCELO R. SORIANO v. SPS. RICARDO and ROSALINA GALIT

  • G.R. No. 156983 September 23, 2003 - In the Matter of the Application for the Habeas Corpus of JOSE VICTOR RIGOR y DANAO v. The Superintendent

  • A.M. No. P-00-1418 September 24, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. CELESTINA B. CORPUZ

  • G.R. No. 124293 September 24, 2003 - JG SUMMIT HOLDINGS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130087 September 24, 2003 - DIANA M. BARCELONA v. CA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136726 September 24, 2003 - PANFILO V. VILLARUEL v. REYNALDO D. FERNANDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148924 September 24, 2003 - TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. v. CA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 153781 September 24, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATEO GREGORIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 153885 & 156214 September 24, 2003 - LEPANTO CONSOLIDATED MINING CO. v. WMC RESOURCES INTERNATIONAL PTY. LTD.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1746 September 26, 2003 - ROGER F. BORJA v. ZORAYDA H. SALCEDO

  • G.R. No. 130330 September 26, 2003 - FERNANDO GO v. MICHAEL TAN and LOLITA TAN

  • G.R. No. 141217 September 26, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUSEBIO DUBAN

  • G.R. No. 144037 September 26, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOEL P. TUDTUD, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 5480 September 29, 2003 - LEILANI OCAMPO-INGCOCO, ET AL. v. ALEJANDRO G. YRREVERRE, JR.

  • G.R. Nos. 137370-71 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL OCO

  • G.R. No. 139185 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO RIVERA

  • G.R. No. 148902 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO ANDRADE

  • G.R. No. 149718 September 29, 2003 - MARIO VALEROSO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 152057 September 29, 2003 - PT & T CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 5854 September 30, 2003 - NORA E. MIWA v. RENE O. MEDINA

  • G.R. No. 127593 September 30, 2003 - CLARA C. DE LA CRUZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 136742-43 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO Y. ALFARO

  • G.R. Nos. 140514-15 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUNE IGNAS

  • G.R. No. 142751 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODRIGO OPELIÑA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143010 September 30, 2003 - MIGUEL DANOFRATA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 144230 September 30, 2003 - ARTURO G. MACKAY v. ADORACION G. ANGELES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148332 September 30, 2003 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY v. MADRIGAL WAN HAI LINES CORP.

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 136274   September 3, 2003 - SUNFLOWER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    THIRD DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 136274. September 3, 2003.]

    SUNFLOWER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, represented by FLORO ARAGAN, Petitioners, v. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE LORIFEL LACAP PHIMNA, MeTC, Branch 77, Parañaque City and ELISA MAGLAQUI-CAPARAS, Respondents.

    D E C I S I O N


    CORONA, J.:


    This is a petition for review of the July 16, 1998 decision of the Court of Appeals 1 in CA-G.R. SP No. 46861 (a) declaring null and void the injunction orders respectively issued by Judge Amelita Tolentino 2 in Civil Case No. 96-0253, for Expropriation, and Judge Rolando G. How in Civil Case No. 96-0480, for Prohibition with Preliminary Injunction; and (b) ordering the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Parañaque City, Branch 78, to enforce its July 8, 1996 Writ of Demolition. The dispositive portion read:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    WHEREFORE, foregoing considered, the injunction orders subject of the instant petition are hereby DECLARED NULL AND VOID. Corollary thereto, the Court of origin, Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 78, Parañaque, is hereby directed to ENFORCE its Writ of Demolition dated July 8, 1996. 3

    The antecedent facts follow.

    Private respondent Elisa Maglaqui-Caparas, in her capacity as executrix of the testate estate of Macaria Maglaqui, filed on March 16, 1993 a complaint for unlawful detainer (Civil Case No. 8550) against Alfredo Mogar and 46 other persons 4 who were occupying several parcels of land (Lots 1-A, B, C, E, F and G) in Yellow Ville, United Parañaque Subdivision IV, Metro Manila. These parcels of land are covered by individual transfer certificates of title 5 registered in the name of Macaria Maglaqui, private respondent’s mother.cralaw : red

    The MeTC of Parañaque City, Branch 78, eventually decided in favor of private Respondent. On appeal, the decision of the MeTC was affirmed by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City, Branch 66. Mogar Et. Al. elevated the case to the Court of Appeals but their petition was dismissed by the appellate court on December 12, 1994. After the dismissal became final, a writ of demolition was issued by the MeTC of Parañaque City, Branch 78. The writ, however, was not immediately implemented because the case was transferred to Branch 77 of the same court. On February 6, 1997, Mogar Et. Al. filed a petition with the RTC of Parañaque City, Branch 257, presided over by Judge Rolando G. How, to enjoin the implementation of the writ of demolition. However, this petition was denied and subsequently, an alias writ of demolition was issued by Judge Vivencio G. Lirio of MeTC Branch 77, the court of origin.

    The alias writ of demolition was, again, not executed, this time due to the ex parte issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction by Judge Amelita Tolentino, in connection with the expropriation case (Civil Case No. 96-0253) filed by the Municipality of Parañaque against the Testate Estate of Macaria Maglaqui.

    Meanwhile, another group of persons occupying portions of the parcels of land (Lots I-F and I-G) subject of the unlawful detainer case, organized themselves into the Sunflower Neighborhood Association (Sunflower), the petitioner herein. On November 18, 1996, Sunflower, represented by one Floro Aragan, filed a complaint for prohibition/injunction with preliminary injunction against private respondent also with the RTC of Parañaque City, Branch 257. Sunflower argued that its members should be excluded from the demolition order as they were not parties to the original unlawful detainer case. To include their houses in the demolition would be to deprive them of due process. This time, Judge How granted the injunction and ordered the exclusion of the houses belonging to petitioner from demolition.

    Thus, private respondent filed a petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with the Court of Appeals (CA G.R. SP No. 46861) assailing both the injunction orders issued by Judge Tolentino in the expropriation case and by Judge How in the prohibition case.chanrob1es virtual law library

    The Court of Appeals ruled in favor of private respondent holding that, as the judgment in the unlawful detainer case had already become final, the execution could not be enjoined. Consequently, the MeTC of Parañaque City, Branch 77 issued another alias writ of demolition on September 14, 1998.

    In order to stay the execution of the writ of demolition, Sunflower filed on January 7, 1999 an urgent motion in this Court for the issuance of a status quo order. This we granted in a resolution dated January 20, 1999. Prior to the issuance of our resolution, however, the writ of demolition was implemented on January 14, 1999. Petitioner thus filed a motion to allow its members to return to the premises, which we granted in another resolution dated April 28, 1999. Thereafter, we required both parties to submit their memoranda.

    Sometime in November 1998, the group of Mogar Et. Al. filed in this Court a petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP No. 46861. However, we dismissed the same on January 18, 1999 for failure of said petitioners to comply with certain procedural requirements, including their failure to submit a certification of non-forum shopping. 6

    For its part, petitioner Sunflower likewise assailed the same decision of the Court of Appeals in this petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Revised Rules of Court.

    Before we proceed, it should be pointed out that any issue relating to the expropriation case (Civil Case No. 96-0253) filed by the Municipality of Parañaque has been rendered moot by the dismissal of that case. This Court, in a Resolution dated January 29, 2003, 7 ordered the presiding judge of the RTC of Parañaque City, Branch 274 to report on the status of the expropriation case filed by the Municipality of Parañaque against herein private Respondent. The presiding judge reported that the case was already dismissed on June 1, 1999 in an order issued by then Presiding Judge Amelita Tolentino who granted the motion to dismiss filed by herein private Respondent. Said dismissal was not challenged by the Municipality of Parañaque. 8

    The basic issue before us is whether petitioner’s members, who were not parties to the unlawful detainer case, may be ejected from the land subject of this case.

    We rule in the affirmative. It is well-settled that, although an ejectment suit is an action in personam wherein the judgment is binding only upon the parties properly impleaded and given an opportunity to be heard, the judgment becomes binding on anyone who has not been impleaded if he or she is: (a) a trespasser, squatter or agent of the defendant fraudulently occupying the property to frustrate the judgment; (b) a guest or occupant of the premises with the permission of the defendant; (c) a transferee pendente lite; (d) a sublessee; (e) a co-lessee or (f) a member of the family, relative or privy of the defendant. 9

    In the case at bar, the records show that petitioner’s members are trespassers or squatters who do not have any right to occupy the property of Respondent. Petitioner does not dispute the ownership of the parcels of land in question. In fact, it even admitted that the subject property is owned by Macaria Maglaqui, mother of private Respondent. 10 Petitioner failed to establish any right which would entitle its members to occupy the land in any capacity, whether as lessees, tenants and the like. Petitioner’s only defense against the eviction and demolition orders is their supposed non-inclusion in the original detainer case. This defense, however, has no legal support since its members are trespassers or squatters who are bound by the judgment.

    Petitioner’s argument that the parcels of land occupied by its members (Lots I-F and I-G) were not included in the original ejectment complaint has no basis. The complaint private respondent filed with the MeTC of Parañaque City, Branch 78, clearly included Lots I-F and I-G as part of the subject matter under litigation in the unlawful detainer case. 11 Thus, petitioner’s members, together with all the parties in the unlawful detainer case, must vacate the disputed land.

    The Court commiserates with respondent, already in her twilight years, who has been unlawfully deprived of her land for a good number of years. Thus, we exhort the court of origin to execute this decision with reasonable dispatch, consistent with the requirements of Section 28 of RA 7279 and EO 152, 12 on eviction and demolition.

    WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED and the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 46861 is AFFIRMED.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    SO ORDERED.

    Puno, Panganiban, Sandoval-Gutierrez and Carpio Morales, JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    1. Penned by former Associate Justice Demetrio G. Demetria and concurred in by Associate Justices Jorge S. Imperial and Ramon A. Barcelona of the Third Division.

    2. Now Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals.

    3. Rollo, p. 20.

    4. Salvador Atregnio, Mauro Macaraig, Carlito Bocar, Erwin Luces, Lope Reside, Victor Gayapranca, Hospicio Bacong, Silvino Ramirez, Imelda Bocar, Morlee Benitez, Charlita Almonte, Rosie Meravalles, Jose Perez, Rodolfo Baron, Estrella Ferocho, Lolita Borja, Charlito Bud-oy, Victor Aquino, Oscar Reside, Mario Montilla, Belen Aranez, Marilyn Brota, Lorenzo Castro, Fred Lobina, Vicente Montelde, Fedrico Muan, Reynaldo Constantino, Anita Bastal, Demetrio Pikiede, Marina Grota, Emily Caguida, Victor Francisco, Franco Balboina, Wilma Barcos, Rodelio del Rosario, Felix Boradas, Rodolfo Gabayeron, Benedicto Bud-oy, Antonio Alsera, Bonifacio Lacorte, Jose Iglesia, Alvin Chua, Julian Vintura, Nina Chavez, Donald Aldave and Florencio Monterde.

    5. Lot 1-A is covered by TCT No. 150218; Lot 1-B by TCT 150219; Lot 1-C by TCT 150220; Lot 1-F by TCT 150223 and Lot 1-G by TCT No. 150224.

    6. Rollo, p. 113.

    7. Rollo, p. 140.

    8. Rollo, p. 141.

    9.. Oro Cam Enterprises, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 319 SCRA 444 [1999], citing Florenz D. Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium [1997].

    10. Amended Petition dated November 15, 1996, C.A. Rollo, p. 56.

    11. CA Rollo, p. 79.

    12. Executive Order No. 152 entitled DESIGNATING THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION FOR THE URBAN POOR AS THE SOLE CLEARING HOUSE FOR THE CONDUCT OF DEMOLITION AND EVICTION ACTIVITIES INVOLVING THE HOMELESS AND UNDERPRIVILEGED CITIZENS AND ESTABLISHING FOR THE PURPOSE A MECHANISM TO ENSURE STRICT COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF JUST AND HUMANE DEMOLITION AND EVICTION UNDER THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING ACT OF 1992, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES, signed December 10, 2002.

    G.R. No. 136274   September 3, 2003 - SUNFLOWER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, 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