Case Summary (G.R. No. L-30602)
Procedural History
The petitioners filed for annulment of the extrajudicial foreclosure asserting that the Jacintos prematurely refused payment for the balance of the purchase price and wrongfully initiated foreclosure proceedings. In response, the Jacintos confirmed the sale but contended that the Sta. Maria spouses were informed of an existing mortgage obligation against the property. The trial court granted a temporary restraining order against the Jacintos; however, numerous adjournments ensued, leading to the dismissal of the complaint without prejudice on the basis of the petitioners' non-appearance.
Motion for Reconsideration and Court’s Orders
Following the dismissal, the Sta. Maria spouses sought reconsideration, claiming their counsel's late arrival due to health issues. The court granted the motion, allowing for a new hearing date. However, once again, neither the petitioners nor their counsel appeared, resulting in another dismissal without prejudice and the court proceeding to hear the defendants’ counterclaim ex-parte.
Judgment on the Counterclaim
The trial court subsequently ordered the petitioners to pay the Jacintos moral damages, attorney’s fees, and compensation for rentals based on the counterclaim presented. The petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, asserting procedural errors, including the lack of a prior pre-trial and the exclusion of their late-filed amended complaint from consideration. The motion was denied, prompting a petition for certiorari to the Court of Appeals, which was also dismissed.
Court of Appeals Findings
The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court’s decision and dismissed the petition for certiorari, ruling that the trial court did not err in hearing the counterclaim since it was independent of the abandoned complaint. It noted the petitioners’ failure to appear and the timing of their actions contributed to the procedural outcome. Additionally, the Appeals Court determined that a pre-trial was unnecessary as the plaintiffs abandoned their claims.
Ejectment and Contempt Issues
After the Court of Appeals issued a preliminary injunction to prevent the ejectment of the petitioners from the property, the Jacintos proceeded to eject the petit
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-30602)
Case Overview
- The case involves a review of a decision by the Court of Appeals which dismissed the petition for certiorari filed by petitioners, Dominador R. Sta. Maria, Jr. and Erlinda Gimeno.
- The petitioners sought to set aside the judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance of Caloocan City regarding a counterclaim from the private respondents, spouses Alfredo V. Jacinto and Venancia Yuson.
- The underlying issue concerns the annulment of an extrajudicial foreclosure on a residential property located at No. 137 Asuncion Street, Morning Breeze Subdivision, Caloocan City.
Factual Background
- The Sta. Maria spouses purchased the property from the Jacinto spouses for P22,000.00, with a partial payment of P14,000.00 made through third parties.
- The outstanding balance of P8,000.00 was not accepted by the Jacinto spouses, who subsequently initiated extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings.
- The sheriff auctioned the property, resulting in a certificate of sale executed in favor of the Jacinto spouses for P27,940.00, exceeding the plaintiffs' obligations and falling short of the property's market value.
- The Jacinto spouses counterclaimed damages for the alleged malicious filing of the annulment suit, attorney’s fees, and rental compensation for the period of dispossession.
Procedural History
- A temporary restraining order was initially granted to prevent the Jacinto spouses from consolidating ownership and dispossessing the Sta. Maria spouses.
- Multiple hearings were scheduled but subsequently postponed, leading to a situation where neither the plaintiffs nor their cou