Case Digest (G.R. No. 192828)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 192828)
Facts:
Ramon S. Ching and Po Wing Properties, Inc., G.R. No. 192828, November 28, 2011, Supreme Court Second Division, Reyes, J., writing for the Court. The petitioners seek review of the Court of Appeals’ December 14, 2009 Decision and July 8, 2010 Resolution in CA-G.R. SP No. 99856, which affirmed the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 6, Manila’s denial of petitioners’ motion to dismiss in Civil Case No. 02-105251.Sometime between November 25 and December 3, 2002, respondents Joseph Cheng, Jaime Cheng, Mercedes Igne and Lucina Santos (substituted by her son Eduardo S. Balajadia) filed a Complaint (docketed Civil Case No. 02-105251 and raffled to RTC Branch 8) against Ramon Ching, Po Wing Properties, Inc., Stronghold Insurance, Global Business Bank/Metrobank, Elena Tiu Del Pilar, Asia Atlantic Resources Ventures, Registers of Deeds of Manila and Malabon, and all persons claiming from Ramon. The Complaint pleaded multiple causes of action including disinheritance (alleging Ramon murdered Antonio/ Lim San and therefore is disqualified from inheriting under Article 919 of the New Civil Code), nullity of various instruments (Agreement and Waiver, Affidavit of Extra-Judicial Settlement, deeds of sale, TCTs), nullification/reconveyance of titles and recovery of a P4,000,000 Certificate of Time Deposit (CPPA), and injunctive relief to prevent disposition of the estate.
The petitioners moved to dismiss the complaint on grounds of forum shopping, lis pendens and res judicata, and principally that the RTC lacked jurisdiction because the matters (filiation, heirship, extent and settlement of Antonio’s estate, and disinheritance) belong to a special proceeding for settlement of estate (probate court) and not an ordinary civil action. The RTC denied that motion in an Omnibus Order dated July 30, 2004, and again denied the later motion to dismiss filed January 18, 2007 by an Order dated March 15, 2007 (denial affirmed May 3, 2006 on an earlier motion for reconsideration) after finding the action to be essentially one to determine ownership and to nullify allegedly fraudulent transfers — matters cognizable in an ordinary civil action; the RTC also observed that disinheritance under Article 916 requires a will and none was pleaded.
Petitioners elevated the March 15, 2007 and May 16, 2007 RTC orders to the Court of Appeals by petition for certiorari (CA-G.R. SP No. 99856). The CA, in a Decision penned by Associate Justice Isaias Dicdican (Remedios A. Salazar-Fernando and Romeo F. Barza, JJ., concurring), denied the petition on December 14, 2009, holding the amended complaint to be an ordinary civil action since plaintiffs primarily sought nullification of documents and protection against alleged fraudulent acts, and because disinheritance may only be effected by will which was not alleged. The CA’s July 8, 2010 Resolution denied petitioners’ motion for reconsideration.
The petitioners filed a Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari to the Court, challenging the CA’s affirmance of the RTC orders. The Court noted petitioners’ failure to comply with a prior Court order to file their reply to the respondents’ Comment/Opposition — the petitioners manifested they would not file a reply only on October 10, 2011, well beyond the deadline. The Supreme Court heard and resolved the petition.
Issues:
- Whether the RTC should have granted the petitioners’ motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because the Amended Complaint raises matters (a) filiations with Antonio, (b) rights of common-law wives to be considered heirs, (c) determination of the extent of Antonio’s estate, and (d) other questions that can only be resolved in a special proceeding (probate) and not in an ordinary civil action.
- Whether the prayers in the Amended Complaint (including disinheritance of Ramon, release of the CPPA held by Metrobank, and nullification of instruments) necessarily convert the action into a special proceeding requiring the exclusive jurisdiction of a probate court.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)