Facts:

The case involves Jesus R. Aznar and Aurora Timber Industries Corporation (petitioners), against the Court of Appeals and Ong Brothers Lumber Co., Inc. (respondents). It is set in the Municipality of Maria Aurora, Aurora Subprovince, Quezon. The dispute began on October 13, 1969, when Ong Brothers Lumber Co., Inc., claimed that the petitioners unlawfully encroached upon its timber concession, removing wood and timber products without authorization. Consequently, Ong Brothers filed a suit in the Court of First Instance of Aurora Subprovince, seeking a restraining order against the petitioners and claiming compensation for the value of the removed timber, along with damages and litigation costs. The Court issued a temporary restraining order, which was later made permanent on May 30, 1970. The resulting judgment required the petitioners to pay Ong Brothers a total of P139,284.51, which included P128,384.51 in damages, P8,000 in attorney’s fees, and P2,900 in litigation expenses.

P

...

Facts:

Parties and Background

• Petitioners:

- Jesus R. Aznar and Aurora Timber Industries Corporation, both logging operators holding timber concessions. - Private respondent Ong Brothers Lumber Co., Inc., holder of an adjacent timber concession. - Allegations by Ong Brothers Lumber Co., Inc. that the petitioners encroached upon its timber concession and removed timber products therefrom.

Court Proceedings in the Trial Court

• Initiation of the case:

- On October 13, 1969, the private respondent filed a suit before the Court of First Instance of Aurora Subprovince seeking: - A temporary restraining order was promptly issued. - After trial, on May 30, 1970, the temporary order was made permanent. - Judgment rendered required the petitioners to pay:

Filing and Perfection of the Appeal

• Timeline and submission details:

- Petitioners received a copy of the decision on June 9, 1970. - Their notice of appeal and appeal bond were filed on July 2, 1970. - The record on appeal, also dated July 2, 1970, was subsequently filed in court on July 6, 1970. - On January 21, 1971, the trial court approved the “amended record on appeal.” - The case was elevated to the appellate level and docketed as CA-G.R. No. 48160-R.

Issues Regarding Completeness of the Record on Appeal

• Motion by the private respondent:

- Soon after the filing of the printed record on appeal, the private respondent moved to dismiss the appeal. - The motion contended that the record on appeal lacked critical data, specifically: - Initially, on November 22, 1972, the respondent appellate court denied the motion to dismiss the appeal. - Later, upon reconsideration following a motion by the private respondent (with petitioners submitting a comment), the CA reconsidered its earlier resolution and, on May 7, 1973, dismissed the appeal.

Current Recourse

• The petitioners now seek writs of certiorari and mandamus:

- Aiming to annul and set aside the CA’s dismissal of their appeal based on the aforementioned technicalities regarding the record on appeal.

Issue:

• Whether the non-inclusion of certain data in the record on appeal – specifically, the trial court’s order directing the amendment, the granted period for submission, and the receipt date of said order – should result in the dismissal of the appeal.
• Whether the trial court’s approval of the record on appeal, which confirmed the timely perfection of the appeal, binds the appellate court despite the omission of the aforementioned details.
• Whether the dismissal of the appeal by the respondent Court of Appeals constituted an abuse of discretion considering the material data rule embodied in Section 6, Rule 41 of the Revised Rules of Court.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)