Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25361)
Facts:
Leonardo Navarro v. Luis L. Lardizabal, et al., G.R. No. L-25361. September 28, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Angeles, J., writing for the Court.On June 3, 1963, Leonardo Navarro (plaintiff-appellant) filed an action for prohibition and injunction, with a prayer for a preliminary mandatory injunction, in the Court of First Instance of Baguio City against Luis L. Lardizabal (City Mayor), Leopoldo Nievera (Chief of Police), Domingo Cabili (City Treasurer) and Jacinto Rillera (Market Superintendent). Navarro alleged he had occupied Stall No. 87 in the Baguio City Market for more than six months after acquiring "full ownership of the business" from the former lessee, Juanita Cachero; that he had paid regular fees; that he applied under Ordinance No. 314-A for formal award of the stall and that his application was pending with the City Market Committee; and that the Mayor ordered his ejectment on June 3, 1963 and the Chief of Police forcibly removed his stock on June 4, 1963, acts which Navarro characterized as without or in excess of jurisdiction and actionable as wrongful interference with possession.
The defendants answered, denying material allegations and raising as special defenses that Navarro had no approved application or contract of lease, that Juanita Cachero remained the lawful, recognized lessee under a valid lease, that Navarro was neither helper nor recognized partner of Cachero, and that the Mayor acted within his powers under the City Charter, Republic Act No. 37, and Department of Finance Order No. 32, which vest municipal authorities with supervision and control over public markets; they thus characterized Navarro as an illegal occupant.
Trial was conducted on the pleadings and documentary exhibits. The record showed Cachero remained the lawful lessee and that Navarro had occupied the stall allegedly pursuant to an agreement with Cachero; however, Navarro’s application for formal award was protested by D. B. Baton on the ground the stal...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the remedy of prohibition and injunction proper to obtain adjudication of Navarro’s right to occupy Stall No. 87?
- Did Navarro establish a legal right to occupy Stall No. 87 such that the Mayor’s ejectment order and the actions of the Chief of Police were without or in exc...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)