ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ G.R. No. 127697. January 17, 2000]
ALEX DEMATA vs. CA, et al.
THIRD DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated
Jan 17, 2000.G.R. No. 127697 (Alex Demata vs. Honorable Court of Appeals, Hon. Rosarito F. Dabalos and Francisco Aala.)
This resolves the Motion for Reconsideration interposed by petitioner of the Decision of this Court dated February 25, 1999, disposing as follows:
"WHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. The Court of Appeals Resolution dated September 27, 1996, dismissing the petition for review, and the Resolution, dated December 2, 1996, denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration are both AFFIRMED."
1 Decision, p. 8; Rollo, p. 88.Although subject petition for review on certiorari was seasonably filed within the extended period, on August 19, 1996; the motion for reconsideration presented on October 25, 1996 was two (2) days late, beyond the reglementary period.
A motion for reconsideration being a statutory remedy, its availment must strictly observe requirements therefor. Here, petitioner explicitly admitted in the Petition2 Petition, p. 13; Rollo, p. 25. itself that his motion for reconsideration was not filed on time. The Court discerns no exceptional circumstance to justify a deviation from the Rules.
WHEREFORE
, there being no compelling reason to warrant a reconsideration of this Court's Decision of February 25, 1999, the motion is hereby DENIED with finality.SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH