ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 144705.
NANCY L. TY v. BANCO FILIPINO SAVINGS AND MORTGAGE BANK
Special Second Division
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 144705 (Nancy L. Ty v. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank)
RESOLUTION
On
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED. The assailed Decision dated
SO ORDERED. [1] cralaw
The Court was asked to resolve this issue: whether Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank (respondent) is guilty of forum shopping and litis pendentia in instituting seventeen complaints for reconveyance against Nancy L. Ty (petitioner), Tala Realty Services Corporation and the other individual defendants, including the complaint before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 46, Manila for reconveyance of two lots in Manila, to enforce a supposed trust agreement.
In resolving this issue, the Court held:
The present case squarely falls within the state of facts on which the rule enunciated in G.R. No. 144700, G.R. No. 130184 and G.R. No. 139166 was premised.
In G.R. No. 144700, the issue of the propriety of the CA's decision in G.R. No. 53836 was raised by Tala Realty. The Court however found no reason to deviate from the CA's decision. It is axiomatic that when a minute resolution denies or dismisses a petition for lack of merit, the challenged decision or order, together with its findings of fact and legal conclusions, is deemed sustained.
Moreover, in the extended resolution dated
In the
x x x x
Here, while there is identity of parties and reliefs prayed for, however, the elements of litis pendentia are not present. The two (2) complaints for reconveyance involve parcels of land in two different places-- Quezon City and Malolos, Bulacan. Records show that the subject lots were conveyed by Banco Filipino to Tala Realty in separate deeds of sale. Thus, the breach of these contracts gave rise to different causes of action. In Ayala Land, Inc. vs. Valisno, we held that a party who filed several actions for quieting of separate certificates of title cannot be held guilty of forum shopping since the actions involved different subject matters and constituted different causes of action. Clearly, petitioners' allegation of forum shopping against Banco Filipino must fail.
x x x x
The resolution in G.R. No. 144700, G.R. No. 130184 and G.R. No. 139166 had long been final and executory. It is beyond cavil, therefore, that since this Court had already ruled on the issue of forum shopping and litis pendentia with regard to reconveyance cases filed by respondent, said issue must be laid to rest and must no longer be disturbed in this decision. Notably, herein petitioner was already heard on this issue as she was the petitioner in G.R. No. 139166. Petitioner cannot claim once again that respondent is guilty of forum shopping. Otherwise, a situation will arise where there are conflicting decisions in these cases. To do so will render inutile the Court's finding in the earlier cases, and undermine the integrity and capacity of the Court to dispense justice equally and fairly. Having settled that respondent is not guilty of forum shopping in same cases, the Court sees no need to revisit this issue. [2] cralaw
On
On
The motion for reconsideration is bereft of merit.
The en banc ruling in
G.R. No. 137533 cannot prevail over those in G.R. Nos. 144700, 130184 and
139166. The Decision in G.R. No. 137533
involved an ejectment suit raising only the issue of de facto possession, while the final
decisions in G.R. Nos. 144700, 130184, 139166, 167255, and the present case,
all involve plenary actions for recovery of ownership of property. G.R. No. 137533 involved a simple complaint
for unlawful detainer falling under the Rules of
Summary Procedure, concerning a different property located in Malolos, Bulacan. It does not involve a full blown suit for
recovery of ownership involving properties in Manila,
much less a judgment on the merits. In
G.R. No. 137533, the Court did not adjudicate on ownership but resolved only
the issue of possession, whether Tala Realty Services
Corporation had a right to eject respondent from the Bulacan
property on the ground of expiration of the lease contract. The Court's June 8, 2005 Resolution in G.R.
No. 167255 finding no reversible error in the CA's July 14, 2004 Decision in
CA-G.R. SP No. 78499 cements the view that G.R. No. 137533 does not put to rest
all pending litigations involving the issue of ownership between the parties,
since it resolves only an issue of de
facto possession involving property located in Bulacan. In a Resolution dated
WHEREFORE, the instant motion for reconsideration is DENIED WITH FINALITY there being NO SUBSTANTIAL ARGUMENT to warrant reconsideration.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] cralaw Rollo , p. 778.
[2] cralaw Id. at 776-778.
[3] cralaw Id. at 780.
[4] cralaw 392 SCRA 506.
[5] cralaw Rollo , p. 894.
[6] cralaw Id. at 911.
[7] cralaw Id. at 913.
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
