Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1953 > August 1953 Decisions > G.R. No. L-4842 August 20, 1953 - YU GOAT v. RESTITUTO HUGO

093 Phil 613:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-4842. August 20, 1953.]

YU GOAT alias TASIO YOUNG, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RESTITUTO HUGO, Defendant-Appellant.

Pastor Salazar and Marcelino R. Veloso for Appellee.

Assistant Solicitor General Guillermo E. Torres and Solicitor Ramon L. Avanceña for Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. NO APPEAL FROM AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER. — Without deciding whether the Court of First Instance of Leyte has jurisdiction over the case (seizure of American cigarettes in alleged violation of Import Control Law), as claimed by the plaintiff, or the Court of First Instance of Manila, as contended by the defendant, acting Collector of Customs at the port of Tacloban, Leyte, the latter cannot appeal from an interlocutory order. The denial of a motion to dismiss a complaint filed by the provincial fiscal, does not entitle the party whose motion is denied to appeal therefrom.


D E C I S I O N


PADILLA, J.:


This is an action for replevin. Plaintiff pleads that he is the owner of 40 cartons of "Camel" and 66 cartons of "Chesterfield" cigarettes valued at P746.40 which he had purchased in Butuan, province of Agusan; that on 23 October 1950 the defendant seized the cartons and retained possession thereof without any legal cause; that on 26 October, after ordering their forfeiture, the defendant directed that at 9:00 a.m. of 22 November the cigarette cartons be sold at public auction in the Customs House at Tacloban, Leyte. He further states that the defendant refused to return the cigarette cartons and would proceed to sell the same unless a writ of preliminary injunction be issued; and that he has no other speedy and adequate remedy than the present action. He prays that upon the filing of a bond in such amount as the Court may fix and require a writ of preliminary injunction be issued; that the forfeiture of the cigarette cartons be held illegal; that the defendant be directed to return the 196 cigarette cartons to the plaintiff and to pay the costs. Upon the filing of a P200 bond the writ of preliminary injunction prayed for was issued.

On 5 December 1950 the defendant filed his answer stating that he, as acting Collector of Customs at the port of Tacloban, Leyte, seized the American cigarettes referred to in the complaint, because the same being of foreign origin were subject to control pursuant to an Act of Congress known as the Import Control Law; that the plaintiff failed to show that the cigarette cartons had been imported legally into the Philippines, there being no internal revenue stamps affixed to the packages, as required before any imported merchandise could be released from the custody of the customs authorities; that for that reason the 106 cartons of American cigarettes were subject to forfeiture pursuant to section 1363 (m-1) of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended; and that the forfeiture thus made and reported, as provided in section 1378 of the Revised Administrative Code, was approved by the Commissioner of Customs on 2 November 1950. The answer filed by the defendant was withdrawn by the provincial fiscal and in lieu thereof he filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. In the motion to dismiss the provincial fiscal states that the Court of First Instance of Leyte has no jurisdiction over the action, on the ground that the seizure and forfeiture of the cartons of American cigarettes in question made by the Collector of Customs at Tacloban were duly approved by the Commissioner of Customs on 2 November 1950 in accordance with sections 1363 e, f, g and m (1) and 1379 of the Revised Administrative Code; and that for plaintiff’s failure to remove or to have the case removed to the Court of First instance of Manila as provided for in section 1383 of the Revised Administrative Code for review of the decision of the Commissioner of Customs of 2 November referred to, said decision became final and executory after 15 days from notice thereof served on the plaintiff on 7 November pursuant to section 1385 of the Revised Administrative Code. The Court ruled that the motion to dismiss having been made after the answer to the complaint had been filed by the defendant came late and set the case for hearing. On 23 December the provincial fiscal in behalf of the defendant filed a pleading entitled "amended answer" where he prayed for the dismissal of the complaint upon the same ground set forth in the motion to dismiss, to wit: that the Court has no jurisdiction over the case, the Court of First Instance of Manila being the one to which the plaintiff should have appealed within 15 days from notice of the decision of the Commissioner of Customs approving the seizure and forfeiture of the cartons of American cigarettes made by the defendant as acting Collector of Customs at the port of Tacloban, Leyte. The Court admitted the last pleading and set the case for hearing on 8 January 1951. On 20 January the motion to dismiss the complaint made in open court by the provincial fiscal was denied. On 1 February the provincial fiscal moved for reconsideration. Acting upon this motion the Court required the fiscal to present evidence to justify the seizure of the cartons of American cigarettes but the fiscal stated that he was not in a position to do so. Whereupon the Court denied the motion. From the denial to dismiss the complaint and to reconsider it this appeal has been taken.

Without deciding whether the Court of First Instance of Leyte has jurisdiction over the case, as claimed by the plaintiff, or the Court of First Instance of Manila, as contended by the defendant, the latter cannot appeal from an interlocutory order. The denial of a motion to dismiss a complaint does not entitle the party whose motion is denied to appeal therefrom.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






August-1953 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-5968 August 5, 1953 - CLARO RIVERA, ET AL. v. FELICISIMO OCAMPO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 588

  • G.R. No. L-4933 August 6, 1953 - PLACIDO NACUA v. ZACARIAS ALO

    093 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. L-6056 August 11, 1953 - TREASURER OF THE PHILIPPINES v. DEMETRIO B. ENCARNACION

    093 Phil 610

  • G.R. No. L-4842 August 20, 1953 - YU GOAT v. RESTITUTO HUGO

    093 Phil 613

  • G.R. No. L-5214 August 21, 1953 - INOCENCIO SIPIN, ET AL. v. FILADELFO S. ROJAS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 616

  • G.R. No. L-5275 August 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO DASIG

    093 Phil 618

  • G.R. No. L-6096 August 25, 1953 - NICANOR JACINTO v. RAFAEL AMPARO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 633

  • G.R. No. L-5588 August 26, 1953 - SALVADOR E. BIMEDA v. ARCADIO PEREZ, ET AL.

    093 Phil 636

  • G.R. No. L-3607 August 27, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NORBERTO E. BERNARDINO

    093 Phil 640

  • G.R. No. L-4371 August 27, 1953 - MARIA GUERRERO v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    093 Phil 642

  • G.R. No. L-4827 August 27, 1953 - JACINTO DE GUZMAN, ET AL. v. VICTORIANO UNGSON, ET AL.

    093 Phil 645

  • G.R. No. L-5793 August 27, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO ESTOISTA

    093 Phil 647

  • G.R. No. L-5197 August 28, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICARDO GAMMUAC

    093 Phil 657

  • G.R. No. L-4083 August 31, 1953 - L. F. LANG v. ACTING PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF SURIGAO

    093 Phil 661

  • G.R. No. L-4689 August 31, 1953 - JOSE T. VALENZUELA v. JOSE I. BAKANI

    093 Phil 672

  • G.R. No. L-4900 August 31, 1953 - FINANCING CORPORATION OF THE PHIL., ET AL. v. JOSE TEODORO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 678

  • G.R. No. L-5054 August 31, 1953 - ENRIQUE A. GARCIA v. NATIVIDAD DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 683

  • G.R. No. L-5113 August 31, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPINO TANGBAOAN, ET AL.

    093 Phil 686

  • G.R. No. L-5180 August 31, 1953 - CONSEJO INFANTE v. JOSE CUNANAN

    093 Phil 691

  • G.R. Nos. L-6355-56 August 31, 1953 - PASTOR M. ENDENCIA, ET AL. v. SATURNINO DAVID

    093 Phil 696