ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 139520. September 13, 1999]

ELEUTERIO MUPAL, et al. vs. NENITA LIM-UYBOCO, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEPT 13 1999.

G.R. No. 139520 (Eleuterio Mupal, et al. vs. Nenita Lim-uyboco, et al.)

The motion of petitioners for extension of thirty (30) days within which to file petition for review on certiorari is GRANTED.

In accordance with Rule 45 in relation to Rule 56 and other pertinent provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court, only petitions which are accompanied by or comply strictly with the requirements specified therein shall be entertained. On the basis thereof, the Court RESOLVES to DENY the petition for review on certiorari for petitioners' failure to give a written explanation on why service of copies of the petition on respondents and the Court of Appeals was not done personally, as a consequence of which the petition is deemed as not filed in accordance with Section 11, Rule 13 in relation to Section 13, Rule 45 and Section 5(d), Rule 56.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE