Title
Supreme Court
Ejercito vs. M.R. Vargas Construction
Case
G.R. No. 172595
Decision Date
Apr 10, 2008
Construction dispute over Panay Avenue improvements; improper summons service led to jurisdictional issues, nullifying proceedings. Supreme Court upheld lack of jurisdiction.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 172595)

Factual Background and Procedural History

On March 5, 2004, the City Government of Quezon City entered into a contract with M.R. Vargas Construction for construction work, which involved clearing operations on Panay Avenue. Following complaints from the petitioners regarding the alleged lack of permits for these operations, they initially sought responses from various authorities, including barangay officials and environmental agencies. After receiving no satisfactory resolution, petitioners filed a petition for injunction before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) on September 10, 2004, naming M.R. Vargas Construction, Marcial R. Vargas, and Renato Agarao as respondents.

Jurisdiction and Service of Summons

Upon filing, the petition was subjected to summons, which was unfortunately returned unserved due to the absence of the respondent enterprise at the stated address. Nevertheless, Judge Marie Christine Jacob of Branch 100 of the RTC issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the same day the petition was filed. Respondents later contested the court's jurisdiction, citing inadequate service of summons and errors in the legal procedures followed, prompting a motion to dismiss on various grounds, including the non-impleading of the Quezon City government as the real party-in-interest.

Trial Court Proceedings and Orders

On October 6, 2004, the RTC granted the petitioners a writ of preliminary injunction. However, following a claim by the respondents that there had been a misrepresentation regarding the service of summons, petitioners’ following applications were met with a nullification order from the RTC dated November 8, 2004. This order led to a series of petitions for certiorari filed by the petitioners before the Court of Appeals to challenge the RTC's nullification.

Court of Appeals Decision

On October 10, 2005, the Court of Appeals dismissed the petition for certiorari filed by the petitioners for lack of merit, affirming the trial court's position that it did not acquire jurisdiction over the case due to improper service of summons. The appellate court held that the presence of Agarao at the hearing did not establish valid representation for M.R. Vargas Construction and that a sole proprietorship does not possess a separate juridical personality. As such, jurisdiction was not properly established without summons being served directly to the owner, Marcial R. Vargas.

Supreme Court Ruling on Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court ruled consistently with the lower courts, affirming that jurisdiction over a defendant must arise from either a proper service of summons or a voluntary appearance that indicates submission to the court's jurisdiction. The Court rejected the argument that Agarao's presence

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.