Case Digest (G.R. No. 115624)
Facts:
Antonio Mago and Danilo Macasinag v. Court of Appeals, Rolando Asis and National Housing Authority, G.R. No. 115624, February 25, 1999, Supreme Court Second Division, Bellosillo, J., writing for the Court.On 19 November 1987 private respondent Rolando Asis filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City (Case No. Q-52319, Branch 83) a petition for injunction and prohibition to prevent the National Housing Authority (NHA) from acting on a recommendation to cancel an award of a lot to him. On 20 November 1987 the RTC directed the NHA to maintain the status quo ante and set a hearing for 26 November 1987. The NHA filed an Answer with Special and Affirmative Defenses on 3 December 1987 asserting, inter alia, that a reblocking plan and later implementation showed the lot involved could properly be divided and that a prior instrument, the "Kasunduan ng Paghahati ng Lote" executed on 23 May 1980, provided for division of the lot in favor of petitioners Mago and Macasinag.
On 27 January 1988 the RTC initially granted the injunction. Thereafter, after motions and pleadings including Asis's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, the RTC on 8 March 1988 dismissed Asis's petition in light of NHA's admissions recognizing Asis's title; by amendatory order dated 30 March 1988 the RTC explicitly ordered the NHA to honor Asis's award and not disturb TCT No. C-39786. Counsel for Asis and for NHA received the March orders in March–April 1988; petitioners Mago and Macasinag first learned of the 30 March 1988 amendatory order on 24 May 1988.
On 2 August 1988 petitioners filed a Motion for Leave to Intervene and a Petition for Relief from Judgment/Order in the RTC. Asis opposed intervention as untimely, arguing finality of the 30 March 1988 amendatory order. The RTC (Judge Estrella T. Estrada presiding) denied the motion to intervene on 30 January 1989, deeming the Petition for Relief from Judgment "inutile" absent intervention; a motion for reconsideration was denied on 6 June 1989. Petitioners appealed to the Court of Appeals, which, in a decision penned by Associate Justice Buenaventura J. Guerrero (with Associate Justices Gloria C. Paras and Cezar D. Francisco concurring), affirmed the RTC on 23 July 1993, applying strict construction to reglementary periods and denying the plea for liberal construction.
Petitioners then brought an appeal b...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Should petitioners’ Motion for Leave to Intervene have been granted despite being filed after the amendatory order of 30 March 1988 had become final?
- Was petitioners’ Petition for Relief from Judgment/Order properly filed and sufficient despite being filed nine days beyond the 60‑day period but within six months and without a se...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)