Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1964 > March 1964 Decisions > G.R. No. L-16018 March 31, 1964 - JOSE BUMANGLAG v. MELECIO BARAOIDAN, ET AL:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-16018. March 31, 1964.]

JOSE BUMANGLAG, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MELECIO BARAOIDAN and HILARION BARAOIDAN, Defendants-Appellees.

Doroteo E. Ventura and Pascual C. Barba, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Castor Raval for Defendants-Appellees.


SYLLABUS


1. JUDGMENTS; NO RES JUDICATA WHERE PRIOR ACTION WAS DISMISSED UNDER ACT 190 AND INVOLVED DIFFERENT ISSUE. — The dismissal of a previous action between the same parties does not bar a subsequent one between them where it appears that the order dismissing the former was issued in 1936 upon motion of the plaintiff therein, with the conformity of the defendants. The effects of said order are determined by the provisions of Section 127 of Acts 190 the law then obtaining according to which the court may allow a plaintiff to dismiss his action, even after trial had begun, and at any time before final judgment, said dismissal not being a bar to another action for the same cause. If it does not bar a second action upon the same cause, it may be concluded, a fortiori, that it cannot bar another action, like the case at bar, which principally involves ownership, while the prior action invoked as a bar was exclusively for recovery of possession and consequential damages.


D E C I S I O N


DIZON, J.:


Appeal taken by Jose Bumanglag from the order of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte in Civil Case No. 1098 dismissing his complaint against Melecio and Hilarion Baraoidan, on the ground of res judicata.

On December 31, 1949, appellant commenced the present action against appellees in the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte to recover the ownership and possession of a parcel of land situated in sitio Darasdas, Barrio Lippas a Bassit, Municipality of Solsona, Ilocos Norte, alleging in his complaint that he had inherited it from his parents, that in the year 1930, his father assigned a portion thereof, with an area of 4 hectares, 28 ares and 40 centares, to Juan Baraoidan, father of appellees, for the latter to clear and cultivate, with the understanding that all the products to be harvested therefrom would belong to him until the total area of the land was fully developed, in which case the produce thereof would be divided equally between the parties; that after the death of Juan Baraoidan, appellees occupied the same portion of land as tenants of appellant’s father under the same conditions; that as appellees began asserting title over the property by clandestinely declaring the same for taxation in their names, an action to recover its possession was instituted by appellant’s father sometime in 1935; that despite repeated demands of appellant for them to surrender and vacate the property, appellees refused to do so.

Appellees moved for the dismissal of the complaint on the ground of prescription of action, alleging that on March 29, 1935 Gregorio Bumanglag, appellant’s father, commenced Civil Case No. 3841 in the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte against appellees for the recovery of the land subject-matter of the present action; that the latter filed their answer therein claiming exclusive ownership over the property; that when the case was called for trial, the court, upon motion of plaintiff Bumanglag, dismissed the same in its order dated October 9, 1936; and that the present action was filed thirteen years after the dismissal of Civil Case No. 3841.

Meanwhile, appellant filed an amended complaint which the lower court admitted on February 8, 1950, denying at the same time appellees’ motion to dismiss the original complaint.

On February 9, 1950, appellees moved to dismiss the amended complaint upon the same ground relied upon as against the original complaint. The Court having denied the motion, appellees filed their answer denying the material allegations of the complaint and interposing the affirmative defenses of res judicata and prescription.

On June 2, 1955, Manuela R. Ablan and Roque Ablan, Jr., widow and son of the late Governor Roque Ablan of Ilocos Norte, respectively filed a motion for leave to intervene, claiming that appellees had ceded a portion of the land in question to the latter as his professional fee in Civil Case No. 3841, but this motion does not appear to have been granted.

On October 4, 1958, the Court set aside its previous order denying appellees’ motion to dismiss and issued the appealed order dismissing the complaint on the ground that the present action was barred by the order of dismissal issued in Civil Case No. 3841 mentioned heretofore.

The complaint filed in Civil Case No. 3841 was exclusively for the purpose of "evicting" the defendants from the property subject- matter thereof, and to recover from them, jointly and severally, the total sum of P900.00 as damages. It was filed in the Court of First Instance for the reason that, according to the complaint, the defendants had unlawfully taken possession of the land "four years before the commencement of this (the) suit." It also appears that the order dismissing said case was issued upon motion of the plaintiff therein, with the conformity of the defendants. As it was issued on October 9, 1936, its effects are to be determined by the provisions of Section 127 of Act 190, according to which, the Court may, in its discretion, allow a plaintiff to dismiss his action even after the trial had begun and at any time before final judgment, said dismissal not being "a bar to another action for the same cause." If it does not bar a second action for the same cause, we may conclude, a fortiori, that it can not bar another action, like the one before Us, which principally involves ownership.

WHEREFORE, the order appealed from is hereby set aside, and this case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, Regala and Makalintal, 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






March-1964 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-14077 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODULO RIVERAL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-15470 March 31, 1964 - CONNELL BROS. CO. (PHIL.) v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-15598 & 15726 March 31, 1964 - CONRADO HABAÑA, ET AL v. JOSE T. IMBO, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-16018 March 31, 1964 - JOSE BUMANGLAG v. MELECIO BARAOIDAN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-16152 March 31, 1964 - JOSE T. ARIVE SR. v. HON. VICENTE S. TUASON

  • G.R. No. L-16243 March 31, 1964 - MANILA YELLOW TAXICAB Co. v. FRANCISCA VILUAN

  • G.R. No. L-16466 March 31, 1964 - PLYWOOD INDUSTRIES, INC. v. JOSE ARAÑAS

  • G.R. No. L-16991 March 31, 1964 - ROBERTO LAPERAL, JR., ET AL. v. RAMON L. KATIGBAK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17032 March 31, 1964 - INSURANCE CO. OF NORTH AMERICA v. UNITED STATES LINES CO., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17074 March 31, 1964 - NAT’L. MARKETING CORP. v. HON. BIENVENIDO TAN, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17085 March 31, 1964 - LUZON BROKERAGE CO. v. LUZON LABOR UNION

  • G.R. No. L-17234 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NICOLAS G. MOJICA

  • G.R. No. L-17629 March 31, 1964 - GREGORIO ROBLES v. CONCEPCION FERNANDO BLAYLOCK

  • G.R. No. L-17790 March 31, 1964 - LORENZO LIM, ET AL v. FRANCISCO DE LA ROSA

  • G.R. No. L-17847 March 31, 1964 - MANUEL A. Q. SORIANO v. FIDEL SAHAGUN

  • G.R. No. L-18046 March 31, 1964 - PAULINO M. CASTRILLO, ET AL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18289 March 31, 1964 - ANDRES ROMERO v. MAIDEN FORM BRASSIERE CO., INC., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18354 March 31, 1964 - CHENG BAN YEK CO., INC. v. AUDITOR GENERAL

  • G.R. No. L-18492 March 31, 1964 - MAMERTO TUBERA, ET AL. v. MARGARITA FERNANDO

  • G.R. No. L-18517 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LORENZO CANDAVA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18616 March 31, 1964 - VICENTE M. COLEONGCO v. EDUARDO L. CLAPAROLS

  • G.R. No. L-18664 March 31, 1964 - ISMAEL CALMA v. HON. JUDGE DOMINGO M. CABAÑGON, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18799 March 31, 1964 - HON. JOSE F. FERNANDEZ, ET AL v. HERMINIO MARAVILLA

  • G.R. No. L-18897 March 31, 1964 - MAXIMA NIETO DE COMILANG v. ABDON DELENELA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18899 March 31, 1964 - IN RE: SIXTO MAGDALUYO, ET AL. v. ACTING DIRECTOR, NBI

  • G.R. No. L-19098 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PLACIDO SUSANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19115 March 31, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. MANILA PORT SERVICE

  • G.R. No. L-19254 March 31, 1964 - BENGUET CONSOLIDATED, INC. v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

  • G.R. No. L-19349 March 31, 1964 - FELICISIMO B. SERRANO, ET AL. v. NAT’L. SCIENCE DEV’T. BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19358-59 March 31, 1964 - CITY OF MANILA v. VENANCIO BACAY, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19389 March 31, 1964 - VALENTIN EDUQUE v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19557 March 31, 1964 - MANILA ELECTRIC CO. v. PASCUAL ORTAÑEZ, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19568 March 31, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE L. CHUPECO

  • G.R. No. L-19619 March 31, 1964 - PRISCO ILAGAN v. MACARIO ADAME, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-19629 and L-19672-92 March 31, 1964 - GUILLERMO PONCE v. MARCELO GUEVARRA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19654 March 31, 1964 - EMILIANO LUSTRE, ET AL v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19799 March 31, 1964 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. PAULINO MANUEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20137 March 31, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO AMIL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-21991 March 31, 1964 - LUIS ASISTIO, ET AL. v. HON. LOURDES P. SAN DIEGO

  • G.R. No. L-22342 March 31, 1964 - HADJI AZIZ LUMNA TANGO v. HON. CRISTOBAL ALEJANDRO, ET AL