Title
Bisaya Land Transportation Co. vs. Cuenco
Case
G.R. No. L-18173
Decision Date
Apr 22, 1968
A quo warranto case against BLTCI led to a cross-claim by stockholder Miguel Cuenco, who filed a lis pendens on corporate properties. The Supreme Court ruled the lis pendens improper, as the case did not directly affect title or possession.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-18173)

Facts:

  1. Background of the Case:

    • In 1959, the Solicitor General, representing the Republic of the Philippines, filed a petition for quo warranto against Bisaya Land Transportation Co., Inc. (BLTCI) and its officers, including Miguel Cuenco, seeking the corporation's dissolution. The petition alleged multiple violations of law, corporate mismanagement, and fraudulent activities.
  2. Cross-Claim by Miguel Cuenco:

    • Miguel Cuenco, a stockholder and director of BLTCI, filed an individual answer admitting the corporation's violations but denied his personal involvement. He joined the petition for dissolution and filed a cross-claim against other directors, seeking reimbursement of misappropriated funds.
  3. Notice of Lis Pendens:

    • On August 31, 1959, Miguel Cuenco filed a notice of lis pendens with the Register of Deeds for Cebu, covering BLTCI's real properties. This was done to protect his cross-claim.
  4. Petition to Cancel Lis Pendens:

    • On November 17, 1959, BLTCI filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Cebu to cancel the notice of lis pendens, arguing it was irregular and unwarranted.
  5. Trial Court Decision:

    • The trial court, presided by Judge Jose S. Rodriguez, ruled in favor of BLTCI, ordering the cancellation of the lis pendens. Miguel Cuenco appealed this decision.

Issue:

  1. Whether the notice of lis pendens filed by Miguel Cuenco was proper and justified under the circumstances.
  2. Whether the petition for quo warranto and the cross-claim affected the title or right of possession of BLTCI's real properties, thereby justifying the lis pendens.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the notice of lis pendens was improper and unwarranted. The Court ordered the cancellation of the lis pendens.

Ratio:

  • (Unlock)

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.