Case Summary (G.R. No. 100643)

Case Background

• Case Title: Adez Realty, Incorporated vs. Honorable Court of Appeals, et al.
• Date of Decision: August 14, 1992
• Court: Supreme Court of the Philippines
• Petitioner: Adez Realty, Incorporated
• Respondents: Court of Appeals, Presiding Judge of Branch 79, Regional Trial Court of Morong, Rizal, Provincial Sheriff of Rizal, Register of Deeds, Quezon City, Aguedo Eugenio

Jurisdiction Over Reconstitution Proceedings

• Legal Principle: The Regional Trial Court of Morong, Rizal, had jurisdiction over the reconstitution proceedings concerning real property in Quezon City.

• Key Details:

  • Jurisdiction was not contested; the issue was related to venue, which can be waived.
  • Relevant Regulation: Section 4, Rule 4 of the Rules of Court allows for waiver of venue objections if not timely raised.

Finality of Judgments

• Legal Principle: Judgments become final and executory once the appeal period lapses without any motion for reconsideration.

• Key Details:

  • The decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 21392 was final due to the lack of appeal from the petitioner.
  • Once a judgment is final, it cannot be amended or modified.
  • Cited Cases: Duenas v. Mandi and Icao v. Apalisok reinforce that errors cannot be corrected post-finality.

Notice and Publication Requirements

• Legal Principle: Publication in the Official Gazette suffices to establish jurisdiction over land registration proceedings.

• Key Details:

  • Personal notice to property claimants is not required as land registration is considered as in rem proceedings.
  • Relevant Regulation: Section 13 of R.A. No. 26 outlines required notice, but publication is deemed sufficient.
  • The failure to send personal notice does not constitute a jurisdictional defect.

Legal Misrepresentation

• Legal Principle: Misquoting or misrepresenting court decisions by counsel constitutes serious professional misconduct.

• Key Details:

  • Petitioner's counsel was found to have intercalated a material fact in the petition, misleading the Court regarding the absence of notice to Adez Realty.
  • Consequences: Counsel is required to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken.

Key Takeaways

• The case emphasizes the importance of timely appeals, the finality of judgments, and the sufficiency of publication for effective notice in land registration proceedings.
• Jurisdictional issues must be timely contested, or they will be deemed waived.
• Legal professionals must maintain accuracy and integrity in representations to the Court, with serious consequences for misrepresentation.
• The petition t

...continue reading

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 100643)

Case Background

• The case involves Adez Realty, Incorporated as the petitioner against several respondents, including the Court of Appeals and the Regional Trial Court of Morong, Rizal.
• The petition was filed on December 28, 1990, seeking to annul the Regional Trial Court's order dated November 20, 1984, which allowed the reconstitution of Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12662.
• The petition also aimed to set aside the decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 21392 dated July 31, 1990.

Court of Appeals Proceedings

• The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition on April 30, 1991, citing lack of merit.
• The dismissal was based on two key points:
  • The petition reiterated issues previously decided in CA-G.R. CV No. 21392, which had become final and executory after no timely appeal or motion for reconsideration was filed.
  • The Regional Trial Court of Morong, Rizal, had jurisdiction over the matter, with the issue being one of venue rather than jurisdiction.

Main Issues Raised

• The petition raised four issues, which were simplified into:
  • Whether the Regional Trial Court of Morong, Rizal, could acquire jurisdiction over reconstitution proceedings involving real property situated in Quezon City.
  • Whether the publication of the notice of the petition in two successive issues of th

...continue reading