Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1924 > October 1924 Decisions > G.R. No. 22667 October 11, 1924 - GETULIO ALMAREZ, ET AL. v. MARIANO FLORENTINO

046 Phil 407:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 22667. October 11, 1924. ]

GETULIO ALMAREZ and JUANITA AVILA, Petitioners, v. MARIANO FLORENTINO, justice of the peace of Vigan, Ilocos Sur, ET AL., Respondents.

Antonio Belmonte, for Petitioners.

The respondent justice of the peace in his own behalf.

B. Soliven and B. Quitoriano for the other respondents.

SYLLABUS


1. COURTS; JURISDICTION IN VACATION; JUSTICE OF THE PEACE OF PROVINCIAL CAPITAL. — During court vacation and in the absence of the vacation judge from the province, a justice of the peace of the provincial capital has power to exercise interlocutory jurisdiction within the province to the same extent as the judge of the Court of First Instance, including the power to appoint receivers.

2. REAL PROPERTY; CIVIL PROCEDURE; ACTION IN EJECTMENT; APPOINTMENT OF RECEIVER; CERTIORARI. — In an action in ejectment, not only the soil but everything thereon growing is in litigation and though the power should be sparingly used, it may sometimes be found necessary in such cases to appoint a receiver in order to prevent waste and the exercise of the court’s discretion in that respect will not be reviewed by certiorari.


D E C I S I O N


OSTRAND, J. :


This is a petition for a writ of certiorari. It appears from the record that in the month of March of the present year, the respondents Cipriana Alvarez, Maria Alvarez, Vicente de Leon and Estefania Morales brought an action against the petitioners in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Ilocos Sur for the recovery of the possession of seventeen parcels of land; that on April 5, 1924, the defendants, herein petitioners, entered a general denial to the complaint and that on May 31, 1924, the respondent justice of the peace, acting as Judge of the Court of First Instance of the Province of Ilocos Sur, on motion of the plaintiffs and over the objections of the defendants in said case, appointed a receiver of the property in litigation on the ground that the said defendants were committing waste on the property and were insolvent.

The petitioners maintain: (1) That inasmuch as there was a vacation judge of the Court of First Instance designated for the district, the respondent justice of the peace had no authority to act as Judge of the Court of First Instance at the time the appointment of a receiver was made; and (2) that even considering that said respondent had authority to so act he, nevertheless, exceeded his jurisdiction in appointing a receiver of the property in question, it not appearing that it was in danger of being lost, removed or materially injured. They therefore ask that a writ of certiorari issue ordering the clerk of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur to certify the record of the aforesaid proceedings to this court and that thereupon the appointment of the receiver be declared null and void and set aside.

The petitioners’ first contention that the respondent justice of the peace had no authority to act as Judge of the Court of First Instance at the time the receiver was appointed, cannot be sustained. It appears that the vacation judge of the Court of First Instance was absent from the province at that time and that the respondent justice of the peace was exercising the functions of justice of the peace of the provincial capital and, as such he had power to exercise interlocutory jurisdiction within the province to the same extent as the Judge of the Court of First Instance. (Act No. 136, sec. 68.)

Neither can we agree with the petitioners that the respondent justice, in appointing the receiver in this case, exceeded his jurisdiction. In an action in ejectment, not only the soil but everything thereon growing is in litigation and it may sometimes be found necessary, in such cases, to appoint a receiver to conserve the fruits of the land and to prevent waste. The power to make such appointments should be sparingly used, but it is not beyond the jurisdiction of the Court of First Instance and the exercise of the court’s discretion in that respect will not be reviewed by certiorari. (Napa v. Weissenhagen, 29 Phil., 180.)

The petition is denied with the costs against the petitioners. So ordered.

Johnson, Street, Malcolm, Avanceña, Villamor, and Romualdez, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman





October-1924 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-22545 October 1, 1924 - BENITA QUIOGE DE V. DEL ROSARIO v. HON. MIGUEL ROMUALDEZ

    046 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. 22547 October 1, 1924 - EPIFANIO ATIENZA WEE CHUCO v. CIRILA MOLINA

    048 Phil 986

  • G.R. No. 21821 October 2, 1924 - WISE and CO. v. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

    049 Phil 966

  • G.R. No. L-21644 October 2, 1924 - PUA CASIM & CO. v. W. NEUMARK & CO.

    046 Phil 342

  • G.R. No. L-21881 October 3, 1924 - E. MACIAS & CO. v. CHINA FIRE INS. & CO., LTD., ET AL.

    046 Phil 345

  • G.R. No. L-21572 October 4, 1924 - MARCELA LLENARES v. FELISA VALDEAVELLA, ET AL.

    046 Phil 358

  • G.R. No. L-21921 October 4, 1924 - ATKINS, ET AL. v. SANTIAGO DOMINGO

    046 Phil 362

  • G.R. No. L-22383 October 6, 1924 - PNB v. MARGARITA Y. QUINTOS, ET AL

    046 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. L-22366 October 7, 1924 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. EUSTAQUIO JOSON, ET AL.

    046 Phil 380



  • G.R. Nos. 21377 & 21659 October 8, 1924 - MATILDE MAGDAÑGAL v. CRISANTO LICHAUCO, ET AL.

    051 Phil 894


  • G.R. No. 22071 October 9, 1924 - HONGKONG & SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION v. VICENTE ALDANESE

    048 Phil 990

  • G.R. No. L-21649 October 9, 1924 - SALMON, ET AL. v. NICOLAS WIJANGCO

    046 Phil 386

  • G.R. No. L-22702 October 9, 1924 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. VICENTE LAOTA

    046 Phil 392

  • G.R. No. L-22345 October 10, 1924 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. FELIPE DIÑO, ET AL.

    046 Phil 395

  • G.R. No. L-22807 October 10, 1924 - GREGORIO R. SY-QUIA v. SHERIFF OF ILOCOS SUR, ET AL.

    046 Phil 400



  • G.R. No. 22390 October 11, 1924 - GOVERNMENT OF THE PHIL. v. MIGUEL J. OSSORIO

    050 Phil 864


  • G.R. No. 22061 October 11, 1924 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. CRISTOBAL FRANCISCO

    046 Phil 403

  • G.R. No. 22667 October 11, 1924 - GETULIO ALMAREZ, ET AL. v. MARIANO FLORENTINO

    046 Phil 407

  • G.R. No. 22770 October 11, 1924 - RAYNUNFO FELIPE, ET AL. v. ANASTASIO TEODORO, ET AL.

    046 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. 22318 October 15, 1924 - METROPOLITAN WATER DIST. v. PUBLIC UTILITY COM.

    046 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. 22134 October 17, 1924 - MARIANO UY CHACO SONS & CO. v. ADMIRAL LINE

    046 Phil 418



  • G.R. No. 21549 October 22, 1924 - TEODORO VEGA v. SAN CARLOS MILLING CO., LTD.

    051 Phil 908


  • G.R. Nos. 21991 & 21992 October 31, 1924 - CHARLES ABOLAFIA v. LIVERPOOL AND LONDON AND GLOBE INS. CO., LTD., ET AL.

    046 Phil 424

  • G.R. No. L-22906 October 31, 1924 - EDILBERTO R. BORJA v. FELIPE AGONCILLO, ET AL.

    046 Phil 432