ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 138835. July 5, 1999]

PILIPINAS BANK vs. HON PRESIDING JUDGE SENECIO O. TAN, et al.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUL 5, 1999.

G.R. No. 138835 (Pilipinas Bank vs. Hon. Presiding Judge Senecio O. Tan, Regional Trial Court, Branch 34, Balaoan, La Union and Clemente Lopez.)

Private respondent constructed a residential house on a land owned by a certain Carolina Yukee with the latter's consent.

Sometime in 1978, the spouses Yukee mortgaged the subject lot to petitioner Pilipinas Bank. Upon default of the spouses Yukee, petitioner foreclosed on the lot, including the residential house owned by private respondent which resulted in private respondent's eviction.

Thus, private respondent filed an action for quieting of title before the regional trial court but the same was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and remanded to the municipal trial court.

Upon trial, the municipal trial court ruled that private respondent is the true owner of the residential house and that the contract of mortgaged did not include said house.

Displeased, petitioner appealed but the regional trial court likewise decided in favor of private respondent. Not satisfied, petitioner filed the instant petition alleging that the municipal trial court did not have jurisdictional over the case.

The petition is unmeritorious.

A perusal of the records reveal that petitioner Pilipinas Bank actively participated in the proceedings before the municipal trial court. Petitioner is, therefore, deemed to have submitted itself to its jurisdiction. Petitioner cannot raise at this point the issue of jurisdiction, under the principle of estoppel, when it participated in the proceedings from start to finish (Zamboanga City Electric Cooperative, Inc. vs. Buat, 243 SCRA 47 [1995]). Furthermore, petitioner failed to raise the issue of lack of jurisdiction in its appeal before the regional trial court. Although jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case may be objected to at any stage of the proceedings even on appeal, this particular rule, however, means that jurisdictional issues in a case can be raised only during the proceedings in said case and during the appeal of said case (Aragon vs. Court of Appeals, 270 SCRA 239 [1997]). Petitioner cannot be allowed to belatedly assail the jurisdiction of the trial court only after it rendered a decision adverse to petitioner.

WHEREFORE, petition is dismissed.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE