Case Digest (G.R. No. L-49510)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-49510)
Facts:
Dagupan Electric Corporation v. Hon. Ernani Cruz Pano, G.R. No. L-49520, January 28, 1980, Supreme Court First Division, Fernandez, J., writing for the Court.Petitioners are Dagupan Electric Corporation (DECORP) and three of its officers — Isabelita L. Llames, Primo C. Narvaez and Jose T. Apigo. Respondents are Hon. Ernani Cruz Pano, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch XVIII, and MC Adore Finance and Investment, Inc. (MC Adore), owner-operator of the Mc Adore International Palace Hotel in Dagupan City. DECORP supplied power to the hotel under contract; a billing dispute arose over charges for June 1978 and subsequent months.
Chronology: MC Adore complained to the Board of Power and Waterworks that DECORP had tampered with the hotel’s meter. The Board issued a restraining order (August 18, 1978) directing DECORP not to disconnect service pending resolution. DECORP later issued a notice of disconnection (November 25, 1978) and, after the 48-hour period, disconnected power on November 27, 1978. MC Adore filed a complaint for damages with a prayer for preliminary mandatory injunction in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Rizal, Branch XVIII (docketed Civil Case No. Q-26502), and the presiding judge issued an ex parte order (December 6, 1978) directing immediate restoration of power and setting a hearing.
MC Adore also filed a petition for contempt and the judge issued an order (December 8, 1978) threatening arrest and confinement of certain corporate officers if the mandatory injunction were not obeyed. DECORP moved for reconsideration (December 11, 1978); the CFI suspended enforcement pending hearing, then after hearings issued a detailed order (December 19, 1978) reinstating the mandatory injunction, conditioning restoration upon deposits and bonds and directing monthly payments pending final determination. Power was restored December 22, 1978.
DECORP filed an original special civil action for certiorari and prohibition in the Supreme Court, alleging lack of jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion by the CFI judge and seeking annulment of the orders of December 6, 8 and 19, 1978 and a writ prohibiting further enforcement. The Court required respondents to comment (Jan. 3, 1979), and thereafter gave the petition due course (Mar. 14, 1979), issued a temporary restraining order, and required memoranda from the parties. MC Adore posted a counterbond; extensive motions and manifestations followed in the Supreme Court concerning the effectiveness of the TRO and implementation conditions.
The Board of Power and Waterworks conducted a verification and replacement of the meter (June 1–2, 1979) and submitted a report on its findings; petitioners relied on the Board’s findings that the old meter was within tolerance and that the newly installed meter’s wiring was acceptable. The Supreme Court issued several resolutions (Mar. 14; May 18; May 28; June 22; July 6, 1979) managing the parties’ submissions, holding the case submitted for decision, and ultimately, after considering the facts and the parties’ memoranda, rendered judgment dismissing the petition for certiorari and prohibition while directing MC Adore to make monthly payments from June 1979 and authorizing DECORP to disconnect service if MC Adore failed to pay within ten days.
The case reached the Supreme Court as an original petition for certiorari and prohibition under the special civil action remedy, and the Court resolved numerous interlocutory motions and factual investigations (including Board of Power tests) before deciding the merits.
Issues:
- Did the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch XVIII at Quezon City have territorial jurisdiction over Civil Case No. Q-26502?
- Did the respondent judge commit grave abuse of discretion in issuing and enforcing the preliminary mandatory injunction directing DECORP to restore electrical service to MC Adore?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)