Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25660)
Facts:
- Plaintiffs-appellants: Leopoldo Vencilao, Mauro Renoblas, and others.
- Defendants-appellees: Teodoro Vano, Jose Reyes, Rosario Reyes, and others.
- Case initiated in the Court of First Instance of Bohol.
- Plaintiffs sought declaration of lawful ownership and possession of certain land parcels.
- Plaintiffs requested court to compel defendants to execute deeds of reconveyance.
- On June 21, 1966, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' appeal, citing Rule 50, Section 1(i) of the Rules of Court.
- Lower court previously dismissed the case for fifteen plaintiffs on grounds of res judicata.
- Court denied the motion to dismiss for remaining plaintiffs.
- Plaintiffs filed a motion to declare defendants in default, denied on August 25, 1965.
- Defendants filed their answer with affirmative defenses on September 20, 1965.
- Plaintiffs sought to disregard this answer, but their motion was denied on October 20, 1965.
- Plaintiffs appealed the trial court's orders regarding the dismissal of the fifteen plaintiffs and the denial of the motion to declare defendants in default.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The appeal from the order dismissing the case concerning the fifteen plaintiffs is allowed to proceed.
- The appeal regarding the denial of the ...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The Supreme Court determined that the order dismissing the case for the fifteen plaintiffs was a final order, making it appealable.
- The order denying the motion to declare the defendants in default was classifi...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25660)
Facts:
The case involves plaintiffs-appellants Leopoldo Vencilao, Mauro Renoblas, and several others against defendants-appellees Teodoro Vano, Jose Reyes, Rosario Reyes, and others. The action was initiated in the Court of First Instance of Bohol, where the plaintiffs sought to be declared the lawful owners and possessors of certain parcels of land. They also requested the court to compel the defendants to execute deeds of reconveyance in their favor. On June 21, 1966, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of the plaintiffs, citing Section 1, paragraph (i), Rule 50 of the Rules of Court. The lower court had previously dismissed the case concerning fifteen of the plaintiffs—namely Alejandro Renoblas, Fausto Gabaisen, Fabian Villame, Gregorio Ita-oc, Fortunato Ita-oc, Faustino Ita-oc, Roberto Haganas, Felisa Haganas, Fermin Haganas, Victoriano Haganas, Julia Sevilla, Ramon Matela, Roberto Matela, Procopia Cabanas, and Vicente Omusora—on the grounds of res judicata. The court denied the motion to dismiss with respect to the remaining plaintiffs. Following this, the plaintiffs filed a motion to declare the defendants in default, which was den...