ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 130044.February 26, 2001]

NYK-FILJAPAN SHIPPING CORP. vs. NEW WORLD INT'L. (PHILS.) INC.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 26, 2001.

G.R. No. 130044(NYK-FilJapan Shipping Corporation vs. New World International (Phils.) Inc.)

For this Court's resolution is the motion to dismiss the instant petition filed by respondent New World International (Phils.), Inc. on the ground that the same has been rendered moot by the termination of the hearing of Civil Case No. 94-2770 for damages against NYK-�FilJapan Shipping Corporation, petitioner.

Upon the filing with the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 62 of Civil Case No. 94-2770, petitioner lodged a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of cause of action and by reason of prescription. Three other defendants also filed similar motions. The trial court denied all the motions, holding that the grounds relied upon by the movants do not appear to be indubitable. Petitioner moved for a reconsideration, but was denied.

Aggrieved, petitioner brought the matter to the Court of Appeals by way of a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the then Revised Rules of Court.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the orders of the RTC. Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration. Upon its denial, petitioner filed with this Court a petition for review under Rule 45 of the same Rules.

It appears that despite the pendency of the instant case before this Court, the RTC heard Civil Case No. 94-2770. During the trial, specifically on December 10, 1997, petitioner filed an urgent motion for the issuance of a temporary restraining order to prevent the RTC from continuing the proceedings. But this Court simply noted this motion.

On September 18, 2000, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this petition on the ground that the same has been rendered moot and academic in view of the termination of the hearing of Civil Case No. 94-2770 before the RTC. In its comment on the motion, petitioner contends that the issues before this Court are not .dependent on the progress of the trial on the merits or the findings of fact by the trial court or the Court of Appeals.

After a careful evaluation of the records of this case, we resolve to grant the motion to dismiss.

As mentioned earlier, the RTC already heard Civil Case No. 94-2770. Consequently, petitioner's motion to dismiss the complaint has become inconsequential. As correctly pointed out by private respondent, the instant petition is akin to an injunction seeking to prevent an act which has already been consummated.

Petitioner's theory that the issues pending before this Court are not dependent on the progress of the trial or the findings of fact in the main case lacks merit. To sustain the instant petition would be to allow petitioner to have his game played in two arenas: one before this Court and the other before the trial court. Certainly, we cannot allow such a scenario. To do so would be to tolerate an unwarranted deviation from the procedural rules.

WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE