SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. L-29949 July 6, 1978

MISAMIS LUMBER COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, vs. THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, THE DIRECTOR OF FORESTRY, ALI DIMAPORO, NAGA DIMAPORO, KAROMATAN TIMBER AND INVESTMENT CO., INC., CABASADA & SONS CO., INC. and JUAN EXPEDITO ALIX, Respondents.

R E S O L U T I O N

AQUINO, J.:

Misamis Lumber Co., Inc. filed on December 17, 1968 this certiorari and prohibition case to set aside the order of the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources dated November 15, 1968 cancelling its timber license at Kapatagan, Lanao del Norte. The respondents answered the petition.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The parties filed memoranda. The case was submitted for decision on August 21, 1969. On November 5, 1970 the petitioner submitted for approval a compromise agreement which reads as follows:

JUDICIAL COMPROMISE chanrobles virtual law library

To put an end to the litigation already commenced in the above-entitled case, the undersigned principal parties thereto and the Lanao Agro Industrial Corporation, which voluntarily appears herein as additional respondent, have arrived at a fair compromise, as follows: chanrobles virtual law library

1. The petitioner, Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., hereby transfers all rights under its timber license No. 124-71, to the Lanao Agro Industrial Corporation, of which respondent Mohamad Ali Dimaporo is the President, for and in consideration of the price of THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P300,000.00) Philippine currency, to be paid jointly and severally by the transferee and Mohamad Ali Dimaporo, in the following manner: chanrobles virtual law library

a. P100,000.00 (by check) - down payment at the signing of this compromise; chanrobles virtual law library

b. P100,000.00 at the office of the Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., Suite 603, Don Santiago Building, 1344 Taft Avenue, Ermita, Manila, on or before January 31, 1971, without the necessity of a demand; chanrobles virtual law library

c. P100,000.00 at the office of the Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., Suite 603, Don Santiago Building, 1344 Taft Avenue, Ermita, Manila, on or before February 28, 1971 without the necessity of a demand.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

This transfer of rights is hereby approved by the official respondents, the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Director of Forestry.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

2. In case of delay in the fulfillment of the obligation to pay, the Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., may secure from the Court a writ of execution against the properties of the solidary debtors. In event the writ of execution is returned unsatisfied, the transfer of rights under timber license No. 124-71 shall be deemed rescinded and the said timber license shall be considered reconveyed to the Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., with the approval of the official respondents, the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Director of Forestry. The Misamis Lumber Co., Inc., may then secure from the court a writ of execution for recovery of the possession of the Kapatagan forest concession from the Lanao Agro. Industrial Corporation and respondent Mohamad Ali Dimaporo, without obligation to make reimbursement of any kind.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

3. This compromise shall be submitted to the Court for approval and judgment in accordance with its stipulations.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Manila, October 30,1970.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

MISAMIS LUMBER CO., INC. Petitioner chanrobles virtual law library

By:chanrobles virtual law library

(Sgd.) FERNANDO LOPEZ (Sgd.) FRANSISCO R. CAPISTRANOchanrobles virtual law library

Respondent Secretary of Vice-Prsident For Legal Agriculture and Natural Affairs Resources Acting Presidentchanrobles virtual law library

JOSE VIADO (Sgd.) DIONISIO N. CAPISTRANO Respondent Director Attorney for the Petitioner of Forestrychanrobles virtual law library

SOLICITOR GENERAL (Sgd.) MOHAMAD ALI DIMAPORO By: Respondent chanrobles virtual law library

(Sgd.) CONRADO T. LIMCAOCOchanrobles virtual law library

Counsel for Official LANAO AGRO. INDUSTRIAL Respondents CORPORATION Assistant Solicitor General Voluntary Additional Respondent chanrobles virtual law library

By:chanrobles virtual law library

(Sgd.) MOHAMAD ALI DIMAPORO President chanrobles virtual law library

The judicial compromise was approved in this Court's minute resolution of November 12, 1970.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Thereafter, nothing was heard from the parties. As the case has remained in the "active" files of the Court, the parties were directed in the resolution of March 6, 1978 to state whether they had abided by the terms of the compromise and whether the case may now be considered closed and terminated.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The Solicitor General, as counsel for the public respondents, stated in his manifestation of May 10, 1978 that only the transferor or the petitioner ran state whether the terms of the compromise had been performed.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Counsel for the petitioner in his manifestation dated June 14, 1978 stated that he is not in a position to state whether the case should now be considered closed because he has not been able to communicate with the president of the petitioner who is now residing in Indonesia.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The other interested parties have not made any manifestation.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

In view thereof, the Court Resolved to direct that this case be ARCHIVED.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.

 chanrobles virtual law library

BARREDO, J., concurring:chanrobles virtual law library

As far as I am concerned, the approval of the compromise by this Court put an end to this litigation, without regard as to whether or not the parties have complied therewith.

BARREDO, J., concurring:

As far as I am concerned, the approval of the compromise by this Court put an end to this litigation, without regard as to whether or not the parties have complied therewith.