ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 91486.  September 28, 2005]

PINLAC vs. CA

FIRST DIVISION

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated SEP 28 2005.

G.R. No. 91486 (Alberto Pinlac, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.)

In a Decision dated January 19, 2001, this Court rendered decision denying the instant petition for lack of merit.

On November 20, 2001 we modified said decision as follows:

WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration is PARTIALLY GRANTED and our Decision promulgated on January 19, 2001 is MODIFIED as follows:

1) reinstating paragraphs (4) and (5) of the Partial Decision of the court a quo and

2) affirming the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 17596 in all other respects.

SO ORDERED.

In a Resolution dated September 10, 2003, the Court partially granted the Republic's Petition for Intervention and further modified the November 20, 2001 Resolution, thus:

WHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, the Petition-In-Intervention of the Republic of the Philippines is PARTIALLY GRANTED. The Resolution promulgated on November 20, 2001 is MODIFIED as follows: The Decision dated March 21, 1988 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 83, in Civil Case No. Q-35762, is annulled insofar as it concerns Lot No. 2, originally covered by OCT No. 614 and Lot No. 3 originally covered by OCT No. 333. The November 15, 1999 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. 17596 is affirmed in all other respects.

As clarified above, paragraph 1 of the dispositive portion of the decision of the court a quo is void insofar as it declares petitioners as absolute owners in fee simple of Lot Nos. 2 and 3.

The Petition-in-Intervention filed by the World War Veterans Legionaries of the Philippines is DENIED for lack of merit.

SO ORDERED.

Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration of the aforequoted Resolution but was DENIED with FINALITY on November 12, 2003. Entry of Judgment was ordered on February 20, 2004.

Thereafter, petitioners filed numerous pleadings, which were NOTED without ACTION in view of the entry of judgment. The latest pleadings filed by petitioners are the instant Supplemental (to the Memorandum For Petitioners); Motion to Annul, Vacate and Set Aside the Entry of Judgment; and Motion for Clarification [of the July 27, 2005 Resolution which noted without action petitioner's motion] with Manifestation and Motion with Leave of Court.

It must be stressed that there must be an end to every litigation. Considering that entry of judgment has already been effected, no further pleadings shall be entertained in this case.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, petitioner's Supplemental (to the Memorandum For Petitioners); Motion to Annul, Vacate and Set Aside the Entry of Judgment; and Motion for Clarification with Manifestation and Motion with Leave of Court are NOTED WITHOUT ACTION. This case having become final and executory on February 20, 2004, the Division Clerk of Court is DIRECTED not to include this case or any of its incidents in the Division agenda.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA ESGUERRA-VIDAL

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE