Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1972 > January 1972 Decisions > G.R. No. L-25890 January 31, 1972 - EUGENIO INTING v. PEDRO BELDEROL:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-25890. January 31, 1972.]

EUGENIO INTING, President, FERMIN S. TORRALBA, VALERIANO MANUNGOLH, SERVANDO BORJA, TIRO & CALOPE, MARGARITO SALIGUMBA, SERGIO JABINES, LEON OLARIO, ANANIAS BELDORO, LIBERATO VILLAPAZ, INTING & SARABIA, JOSE VERTULFO, SALVADOR SALUGSUGAN, CIPRIANO DEGOLASION, JUSTINIANO ESTOQUE, FORTUNATO ARANAS, NICOLAS, PAHANG, SANTIAGO CINCO, BENEDICTO, TORO, QUIRINO LOPENA, SABAS DOMINGUEZ, TEOTIMO BORJA, and RESTITUTO ITONG, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MAYOR PEDRO BELDEROL, VICE MAYOR HILARIO BRUÑIDOR, ROLANDO BUTALID, PAUL E. HOLGANZA, MERARDO BAROL, PABLO BUHION, HILARION ZAMORA, TEODORICO MAJAROCON, Members of the Municipal Council, Tagbilaran, Bohol, Defendants-Appellees.

Anastacio A. Mumar and Bonifacio M. Belderol for plaintiffs and appellants.

Jesus Borromeo for defendants and appellees.


SYLLABUS


REMEDIAL LAW; APPEAL; DISMISSAL AS MOOT; REPEAL OF ORDINANCE VALIDITY OF WHICH IS ASSAILED. — Where the decision of the inferior court sustaining the validity of Ordinance 3, series of 1958, of Tagbilaran, Bohol, was appealed, and during the pendency of such appeal, Ordinance 15, series of 1960, of the same municipality, was approved, Section 1 of which is in conflict with the provisions of the former ordinance, thus repealing said Ordinance 3, it is unnecessary and of no practical value to resolve the issues raised by the appellants regarding the validity of said Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958.


R E S O L U T I O N


MAKALINTAL, J.:


This appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Bohol in its Civil Case No. 1160 was originally taken to the Court of Appeals but was subsequently certified to this Court, since the issue involves no facts and refers solely to the validity of a municipal ordinance.

On November 25, 1957 Eugenio Inting, in his capacity as president of the Tagbilaran Cockpit, obtained a building permit for the construction of a cockpit of strong materials in the poblacion of Tagbilaran, Bohol. After the building was constructed Inting applied for a permit for the operation of the cockpit beginning January 1, 1958. As said building was found to have met all the legal requirements, Mayor Pedro Belderol of Tagbilaran granted the permit applied for on January 10, 1958, after payment of the sums of P10.00 for the permit fee and P200.00 for the license fee. The permit was valid "as long as the yearly permit fee of P10.00 and the license fee are paid or until revoked." On March 21, 1958 Inting again paid the amount of P600.00 to the Municipal Treasurer of Tagbilaran as license fee for three quarters ending December 31, 1958. Subsequently, on April 1, 1958 the municipal council of Tagbilaran approved Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958, which provided, among other things, that:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, corporation, or entity to operate a cockpit in Tagbilaran without having been awarded to do so by the Mayor after such person, corporation or entity has been declared as the highest bidder;

"Section 2. The Municipal Council shall conduct a bid for the right to operate a cockpit in Tagbilaran and shall declare the highest bidder among the bidders. No bid less than P1,000.00 shall be accepted.

x       x       x


"Section 4. The yearly permit and license fee for a cockpit shall be Twenty Pesos (P20.00) and Two Thousand Four Hundred Pesos (P2,400.00), respectively, which shall be paid within five days after the bid is being awarded to the highest bidder and no license shall be issued by the Municipal Treasurer unless the cockpit to be operated is situated in any of the places mentioned in Section five (5) hereinbelow.

"Section 5. Cockpit building shall only be constructed along any of the following streets:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

(1) Libertad North, from the Bisaya Land Transportation Co.

(2) C. Gallares St., from J.A. Clarin to Parras St.

(3) Bonifacio St., from Luna to Parras Streets, and

(4) Parras St., from Libertad to C. Gallares Sts.

"All cockpits presently operating and constructed outside of the places mentioned above shall cease to operate immediately after the date fixed for holding the bid.

x       x       x


"Section 8. This Ordinance shall take effect upon approval."cralaw virtua1aw library

The municipal council of Tagbilaran, in its Resolution No. 17, set the public bidding of the exclusive right to operate a cockpit on April 16, 1958. Consequently, by virtue of Section 5 of the ordinance aforequoted, Tagbilaran Cockpit would have to cease operation after the aforementioned date. To forestall its closure Inting and the members of his association filed a complaint in the court a quo against the Municipal Mayor and the members of the municipal council of Tagbilaran, questioning the validity of Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958. The plaintiffs also sought the issuance of a preliminary injunction to restrain the defendants from closing their cockpit during the pendency of the suit. In the meantime, the municipal council postponed the public bidding until the legality of the ordinance was resolved by the court.

On October 7, 1959 the lower court rendered its decision sustaining the validity of the ordinance in question. However, it held that inasmuch as said ordinance involved an increase of license tax on cockpits by more that fifty percent (50%) of the existing rate it was subject to approval by the Secretary of Finance pursuant to Section 4, No. 3 of Commonwealth Act No. 472, and since it was not yet so approved it was still ineffective. Thus, the dispositive portion of the decision states:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Court renders judgment enjoining defendants to refrain from putting in operation Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958 (Annex F). Be it understood however, that once it is approved by the Secretary of Finance, the municipality of Tagbilaran, through its municipal council, shall have the right to carry into effect its provisions in the manner provided for by law."cralaw virtua1aw library

Not being in conformity with the decision, the plaintiffs instituted the instant appeal, alleging that the trial court erred in holding that Municipal Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958, was not yet effective and in not holding that said ordinance was null and void on two grounds, namely, that the municipal council had no power and authority to sell at public auction the privilege to operate a cockpit and that said ordinance was contrary to the provisions of Republic Act No. 1224.

Instead of filing a brief, the appellees, through the Provincial Fiscal of Bohol, submitted a manifestation asking in effect for the dismissal of the instant appeal on the ground that the issues raised by the appellants had been rendered academic by the approval by the municipal council of Tagbilaran of Ordinance No. 15, series of 1960, which provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Section 1. It shall be unlawful for any person, partnership, corporation or entity to establish and operate a cockpit within the poblacion proper of Tagbilaran, Bohol; PROVIDED HOWEVER: That cockpits already established within Poblacion proper of Tagbilaran shall be given six (6) months up to June 30, 1961, without grace from the effectivity of this ordinance, within which to cease or transfer operation; PROVIDED FURTHER: That a cockpit may be established and operated in the barrios of Tagbilaran, Bohol, subject to the payment of ONE HUNDRED (P100.00) PESOS license fee per quarter or FOUR HUNDRED (P400.00) PESOS per annum payable to the Municipal Treasurer before operation as long as it is not within a radius of three hundred (300) lineal meters from any public building, public or private school, hospital, church or chapel and public plaza.

"Section 2. Any ordinance or part thereof in conflict with this Ordinance is hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

x       x       x


"Section 4. This Ordinance shall take effect on January 1, 1961."cralaw virtua1aw library

Since the provisions of Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958, are in conflict with Section 1 of Ordinance No. 15, series of 1960, the former ordinance is deemed repealed by virtue of Section 2 of the latter ordinance. Consequently, it is unnecessary and of no practical value to resolve the issues raised by the appellants regarding the validity of Ordinance No. 3, series of 1958.

WHEREFORE, this appeal is hereby dismissed for being moot and academic. No costs.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Villamor and Makasiar, 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






January-1972 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-33541 January 20, 1972 - ABDULGAFAR PUÑGUTAN v. BENJAMIN ABUBAKAR

  • G.R. No. L-30491 January 21, 1972 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. JOSE CAÑETE

  • G.R. No. L-24420 January 26, 1972 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. JOSE T. SURTIDA

  • Adm. .Case. No. 174-J January 28, 1972 - SIMEON TOLENTINO v. JOSE C. COLAYCO

  • G.R. No. L-24005 January 29, 1972 - UNIVERSAL MILLS CORPORATION v. BUREAU OF CUSTOMS

  • Adm. Case No. 389 January 31, 1972 - IN RE: DISBARMENT OF ARMANDO PUNO v. ARMANDO PUNO

  • G.R. No. L-20174 January 31, 1972 - IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHIL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-25802 January 31, 1972 - DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHIL. v. LEONOR R. VDA. DE MOLL

  • G.R. No. L-25885 January 31, 1972 - LUZON BROKERAGE CO., INC. v. MARITIME BUILDING CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-25890 January 31, 1972 - EUGENIO INTING v. PEDRO BELDEROL

  • G.R. No. L-26695 January 31, 1972 - JUANITA LOPEZ GUILAS v. JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF PAMPANGA

  • G.R. No. L-27172 January 31, 1972 - PROVINCIAL FISCAL NATALIO P. AMARGA v. HON. CIPRIANO VAMENTA, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-27172 January 31, 1972 - AMANTE PURISIMA v. HON. DEOGRACIAS S. SOLIS

  • G.R. No. L-28756 January 31, 1972 - HON. ANTONIO V. RAQUIZA v. EQUIPMENT MARKETING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. L-29125 January 31, 1972 - PROCTER & GAMBLE TRADING COMPANY v. MUNICIPALITY OF MEDINA, MISAMIS ORIENTAL

  • G.R. No. L-29275 January 31, 1972 - FLORENTINO PANGILINAN, ET., AL. v. HON. ANDRES AGUILAR

  • G.R. No. L-29935 January 31, 1972 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FEDERICO C. TOREJAS

  • G.R. No. L-30247 January 31, 1972 - VICTOR H. M. GUTIERREZ v. HON. NUMERIANO ESTENZO

  • G.R. No. L-30977 January 31, 1972 - CARMEN LAPUZ SY v. EUFEMIO S. EUFEMIO

  • G.R. No. L-31429 January 31, 1972 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSCOE DABAN Y GANZON

  • G.R. No. L-33471 January 31, 1972 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS