JAPRL VS SECURITY BANK CORPORATION
G.R. No. 190107 June 6, 2011
FACTS:
JAPRL a domestic corporation availed a credit facility amounting to 50M from Security Bank
Corp. (SBC). That on Nov. 2001, Chairman Limson and President Arollado ( JAPRL) executed a
Continuing Suretyship Agreement wherein they guaranteed JPRL’s payment and performance.
However the documents provided to SBC on the above transaction were untrue , thus prompting
SBC to demand for payment and performance. Petitioners failed to comply SBC’s demand hence
SBC filed in RTC Makati City a complaint for sum of money with application for issuance of Writ of
Preliminary Attachment. While the above action is pending SBC received a Stay Order issued from
RTC Quezon City where JAPRL petition for rehabilitation was lodged.
Makati RTC dismissed SBC’s complaint without prejudice, SBC file a motion for
reconsideration. Meanwhile the proposed rehabilitation in RTC Quezon City was disapproved
reinstating SBC’s complaint in RTC Makati, the same was then denied by RTC Makati prompting
SBC to appeal.
ISSUE:
Is the jurisdiction over the defendant in the original case lies in Makati RTC?
RULING:
Yes. Jurisdiction of the court over its defendant (in the original case) can be obtained either
by valid service of summon upon him or by his voluntary submission to the court’s authority.
That in the instant case petitioners had submitted themselves voluntarily to the jurisdiction of
Makati RTC despite the qualification that the filing of their respective Oppositions and Manifestation
was by way of special appearance and that they sought relief by praying for the archiving of SBC’s
complaint in the same court.
REPUBLIC VS RCAM
G.R. No. 192975 November 12, 2012
FACTS:
.It appears that respondent RCAM owned 8 parcels of land with a total area of 39.79.00 in
Obando Bulacan allegedly emanated from Decree no. 57486 . These lots were sold and certificate
of title were issued to the third party. However in the investigation it was found out the subject lots
were not yet declared alienable and disposable during the grant and sale to the third party.
Petitioner Republic filed a complaint before the Malolos RTC for cancellation of titles and reversion
against the respondent. Respondent filed a motion to dismiss assailing the jurisdiction of RTC, which
was then denied. Respondent then elevated to CA, CA then grants RCAM’s motion to dismiss.
ISSUE:
Is the jurisdiction over the action filed by the petitioner lies in RTC?
RULING:
Yes, RTC has jurisdiction in cancellation of title and reversion suits which do not call
annulment of judgment of the RTC acting as Land Registration Court.
In the instant case it involves the title to , or possession of title and reversion or any interest
therein, where the assessed value of the property exceeds Php. 20, 000.00 then if fall under the
jurisdiction of the RTC.
BAGUNU VS AGGABAO
G.R. No. 186487 August 15, 2011
FACTS:
Petitioner bought a parcel of lot identified as Lot 322 from a certain Attty. Binag. This subject
lot has pending free patent application in Bureau of Lands (Land Management Bureau). During the
pendency of the application, respondents in this case filed a protest in DENR against the petitioner
asserting that they are the owner of the Lot 322 based on the Deeds of Extrajudicial Settlement
executed in their favor. Respondents contended that the lot referred to by the petitioner is not the
Lot 322 but the Lot 258 based on the technical descriptions of the property.
DENR Regional Officer rendered a decision in favor of the respondents, identifying Lot 258
and not Lot 322 is being described by the technicalities of the property sold to the petitioner. On the
appeal DENR Secretary affirmed the decision, the same when the appeal reached CA.
ISSUE:
Is DENR correct in taking primary jurisdiction over the dispute on the subject property?
RULING:
Yes. DENR has primary administrative jurisdiction to resolve conflicting claims over public
lands, as authorized by the Bureau of Lands. It provides that when the determination of the case
requires expertise, specialized training and knowledge of an administrative body, relief must first be
obtained in the administrative proceeding before resorting to the court.
In the instant case, the property in dispute has still pending free patent application on that
reason it still classified as a public land where DENR takes primary jurisdiction.
