ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ G.R. No. 130433. January 31, 2000]
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS, et al. vs. MAXIMO I. PLANES et al.
SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 31 2000.
G.R. No. 130433 (Republic of the Philippines, represented by Antonio B. Cabuco, Register of Deeds of Cavite vs. Maximo I. Planes, represented by Attorney-in-fact Jose R. Perez.)
On February 11, 1992 Maximo I. Planes, represented by his attorney-in-fact, Jose R. Perez, filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Trece Martires, Cavite, Branch 23, a petition for the reconstitution of Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. 219 covering a parcel of land in Barrio Lantic, Carmona, Cavite. Maximo claimed that he is one of the heirs of Carlos Planes, the registered owner of the parcel of land covered by said OCT. OCT No. 219, which was however destroyed or lost when the Provincial Capitol Building of Cavite was razed by fire on June 7, 1959. From the date of its loss, no pending transaction or document concerning the land has allegedly been made.
On October 30, 1992, the trial court granted the petition for reconstitution, ordering the Register of Deeds to reconstitute OCT No. 219 upon the payment of corresponding fees making use as basis thereof, the owner's duplicate certificate of title. There having been no appeal interposed from the order directing reconstitution of OCT No. 219, the same became final and executory on November 16, 1992.
On November 17, 1992, said order, together with its certificate of Finality, was presented for registration to the Register of Deeds of Cavite. Finding that there was a discrepancy as to the date when the decree was issued as appearing on the owner's duplicate certificate of title and on the certification issued by Engr. Silveria Perez, Director of the Department of Registration of the Land Registration Authority, Register of Deeds Antonia B. Cabuco, on November 27, 1992, filed a Manifestation with the RTC questioning the order of October 30, 1992.
On October 8, 1994, the Office of the Solicitor General, for the petitioner Republic of the Philippines, filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals claiming that the grant of the reconstitution of OCT No. 219 in favor of Maximo Planes is contrary to law and evidence.
On April 29, 1996, while the case was pending appeal, Maximo Planes died.
On May 14, 1997, the Court of Appeals ruled against petitioner solely for the reason it was filed beyond the reglementary period to appeal. The Court of Appeals said that perfection of am appeal within the statutory period is not only mandatory but also jurisdictional, and failure to do so renders the questioned decision final and executory, thus depriving the appellate court of jurisdiction to alter the final judgment, much less to entertain the appeal.
On September 19, 1997, petitioner filed in this Court a petition for review assailing the dismissal by the Court of Appeals of its appeal from the Order of the trial court directing the reconstitution of OCT No. 219.
It has come to the attention of the Court that the counsel for Jose Perez who is the attorney in fact of the late Maximo Planes never informed the appellate court of the death of Planes while the case was pending appeal. In fact, had intervenor Landhaus Properties and Development Corporation not questioned the legal personality of Jose Perez to appear as representative for Maximo Planes before the appellate court, the Court up to this time would not have even known that Maximo Planes had already passed away.
Under Sec. 16, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court, whenever a party to a pending action dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to inform the court of the fact thereof within (30) days after such death and to give the name and address of his legal representative or representatives.
Pursuant to the aforesaid rule, the Court RESOLVES to acquire Jose Perez, who has represented Maximo Planes in all the proceedings before the trial and appellate courts, to give to this Court within fifteen (15) days from receipt of this resolution, the name and address of the legal representative/s of Maximo Planes for purposes of the proper substitution of parties.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
