Case Digest (G.R. No. 164789)
Facts:
Christian General Assembly, Inc. v. Sps. Avelino C. Ignacio and Priscilla T. Ignacio, G.R. No. 164789, August 27, 2009, Supreme Court Second Division, Brion, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Christian General Assembly, Inc. (CGA) bought a subdivision lot (Lot 1, Block 4, Villa Priscilla Subdivision) from respondents Sps. Avelino C. Ignacio and Priscilla T. Ignacio under a Contract to Sell dated April 30, 1998, later amended on August 5, 2000 to extend the payment period and adjust the consideration. CGA made installment payments but later discovered title defects: the lot formed part of consolidated Lots 2‑F and 2‑G Bsd‑04‑000829 and was implicated in agrarian‑related retention proceedings involving Purificacion S. Imperial; the Department of Agrarian Reform issued an October 2, 1997 order granting Imperial retention, which was affirmed on appeal and ultimately sustained by the Court in a separate matter.
On April 30, 2002, CGA filed a complaint for rescission of the Contract to Sell and for refund of payments, damages and attorney’s fees in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 14, Malolos, Bulacan, alleging respondents fraudulently concealed that the property was part of land under litigation and could not be delivered free of liens and encumbrances. Rather than answering, respondents moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, contending the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) has exclusive jurisdiction over disputes involving subdivision lots under P.D. No. 957 and P.D. No. 1344.
The RTC denied the motion to dismiss on October 15, 2002, holding rescission and damages based on fraudulent misrepresentation were outside HLURB jurisdiction. Respondents petitioned for certiorari to the Court of Appeals (CA). The CA, in a decision dated October 20, 2003 (CA‑G.R. SP No. 75717), set aside the RTC order and dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, conclud...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Does the HLURB have exclusive jurisdiction over CGA’s action for rescission and refund arising from a Contract to Sell a subdivision lot?
- Was the Court of Appeals correct to dismiss the complaint filed with the RTC for lack o...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)