ChanRobles Virtual law Library

chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

[G.R. No. 140486.September 10, 2001.]

PUBLIC ESTATES AUTHORITY vs. JESUS YUJUICO et al.

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEPT 10 2001.

G.R. No. 140486. (Public Estates Authority vs. Jesus Yujuico and Augusto Carpio.)

On 04 July 2001, respondents filed their "Manifestation and Motion" praying that petitioner's "Motion to Suspend the Resolution of the Motion for Reconsideration" be merely NOTED because this Court, had already denied, in its resolution of 09 May 2001, petitioner's motion for reconsideration with finality.

On 28 June 2001, petitioner filed a Motion to Set Aside the Resolution of 09 May 2001, and for Leave to File a Second Motion for Reconsideration. Petitioner contended that the unique and peculiar facts attendant to the case warranted the setting aside of the dismissal of the instant petition. It argued that if the Republic would be able to prove the nullity of respondents' titles in Civil Case No. CV-01-0222 then the 15th May 1998 compromise agreement would have had no valid consideration. Corollarily, petitioner insisted that the denial of the instant petition would be prejudicial to the complaint for annulment of title it had filed against Fermina Castro and herein respondents before the Regional Trial Court of Para�aque by being constrained to comply with its obligation under the compromise agreement, i.e., to convey a portion of its land at Central Boulevard Park (CBP) to respondents in exchange for titles which the Republic seeks to cancel in Civil Case No. CV-01-0222.

Respondents filed their comment and opposition to petitioner's motion, averring that petitioner could still raise all matters it would deem relevant in seeking the cancellation of OCT No. 10218 and their derivative titles in the suit for annulment of title it instituted against respondents and their predecessor-in-interest.

After deliberating on the respective pleadings of the parties, the Court has resolved to simply NOTE respondents' manifestation and motion filed on 04 July 2001 and their comment and opposition to petitioner's motion to set aside the Court's resolution of 09 May 2001; and to DENY for lack of merit (a) petitioner's motion to suspend the resolution of its motion for reconsideration and to set aside the resolution of 09 May 2001 and (b) its second motion for reconsideration.

The Court reiterates that the denial of the instant petition does not foreclose the right of the Republic from pursuing any such remedies as it may deem warranted. Petitioner itself admits in its second motion for reconsideration that even if the compromise agreement were to be implemented, the government could still recover from respondents the lots subject thereof in a different action. On the other hand, to hold that the compromise agreement should not be implemented because of a possibility that respondents' titles might be annulled in the separate suit instituted by the Republic 1 Civil Case No. CV-01 -0222. would be to speculate on the results of that litigation.

WHEREFORE, the motion to set aside the Court's resolution, dated 09 May 2001, and petitioner's second motion for reconsideration are denied for lack of merit.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

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