Case Digest (G.R. No. 134622)
Facts:
Aminin L. Abubakar v. Aurora A. Abubakar, G.R. No. 134622, October 22, 1999, the Supreme Court First Division, Davide, Jr., C.J., writing for the Court.Aminin L. Abubakar (petitioner) and Aurora A. Abubakar (respondent) were married in Jolo, Sulu, on May 1, 1978 under Islamic law. In February 1996, Aurora filed before the 1st Shariah Circuit Court of Isabela, Basilan Province (Case No. 537) a Complaint for Divorce with Prayer for Support and Damages, alleging among others that Aminin contracted a subsequent marriage without her consent, invoking Articles 27 and 162 of Presidential Decree No. 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal Laws).
In a pre-trial order dated March 21, 1997, the Circuit Court limited the sole trial issue to the parties' rights or respective shares with respect to partition after divorce, identifying as the properties subject to partition: (a) a half-duplex on Lot No. 1845-B-2, Tumaga Por Centro, Zamboanga City (TCT No. T-86,898); (b) an adjacent 550-sq.m. lot (Lot No. 1845-B-3; TCT No. 86,899); and (c) a house and lot at Block 2, Lot 44, Kasanyangan Village, Jolo, Sulu (TCT No. T-1820, 240 sq.m.) (collectively, the PROPERTIES). The parties agreed to the divorce, the idda (waiting period), and the limitation of partition to the PROPERTIES.
On August 29, 1997, the Circuit Court dissolved the marriage by faskh, awarded the PROPERTIES to be equally distributed as co-owners, and granted Aurora P10,000 as support for the three-month idda. Aurora appealed only insofar as the partition issue was concerned, leaving the divorce decree and damages unchallenged in her favor.
On May 20, 1998, the 3rd Shariah Judicial District Court of Zamboanga City (Appeal Case No. 01-97) affirmed the Circuit Court's grant of divorce but modified the judgment: it included an agricultural lot in Alicia, Zamboanga del Sur among the properties to be partitioned, ordered Aminin to pay Aurora support arrears totaling P110,000 (P5,000 monthly for 22 months), and awarded P50,000 as moral damages. Aminin moved for reconsideration, arguing that the District Court exceeded the issues properly before it since those modifications were not raised in the appeal; the motion was denied on July 15, 1998.
Aminin then brought the case to the Supreme Court, seeking reversal of the District Court's modifications — specifically the award of moral damages, the grant of support in arrear...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the 3rd Shariah Judicial District Court err in modifying the Circuit Court's judgment on matters (partition of the Alicia lot, support in arrears, and moral damages) that the appellant did not raise in her appeal?
- Is a pre-trial order that limits the issues to be tried binding on the parties and controlling on the scope of the trial and...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)