THIRD DIVISION ZENAIDA POLANCO, CARLOS G.R. No.

182426

DE JESUS, AVELINO DE JESUS, BABY DE JESUS, LUZ DE JESUS, an DE!ETRIO SANTOS, P%"&"n#'

P"#$#$on"%&,

Yna%"&(San#$a)o, J. *C+a$%,"%&on-, ( ."%&/& ( A/&#%$a(!a%#$n"0, C+$1o(Na0a%$o, Na1+/%a, an P"%a2#a, JJ. CAR!EN CRUZ, %",%"&"n#" a##o%n"4($n(5a1#, VIRGILIO CRUZ, R"&,on "n#. 7"3%/a%4 18, 299: x ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- x 34 +"% P%o6/2)a#" '

DECISION
YNARES(SANTIAGO, J.:

This Petition for Review on Certiorari1[1] assails the August 28, 200 %.R. #& 'o. !e"ision2[2] of the #ourt of A$$eals in #A(0 ), setting asi*e the +r*er ,[,] of -ran"h 1

of the Regional Trial #ourt of .alolos in #ivil #ase 'o. (/2-.2000, whi"h *is0isse* res$on*ent1s #o0$laint/[/] for failure to $rose"ute. Resolution([(] Also assaile* is the .ar"h 28, 2008 *en2ing $etitioners1 .otion for

Re"onsi*eration.3[3]

The fa"ts are as follows:

Res$on*ent #ar0en #ru4, through her attorne2-in-fa"t, &irgilio #ru4, file* a "o0$laint for *a0ages [ ] against $etitioners for allege*l2 *estro2ing her $ala2 "ro$s. 5hile a*0itting that $etitioners own the agri"ultural lan* she
1[1] Rollo, pp. 3-10. 2[2] Id. at 15-23; penned by Associate Justice Edgardo F. undia! and concurred in by Associate Justices "onrado #. $as%ue&, Jr. and #onina Are'a(o-)enarosa. 3[3] Id. at *2. +[+] Id. at 3+-3,. 5[5] Id. at 31-33. -[-] Id. at 2+-2.. ,[,] "ar!en "ru&, represented by /er attorney-in 0act, $irgi(io "ru&, p(ainti00 '. "ar(os 1e Jesus, A'e(ino 1e Jesus, "ar(os 1e Jesus, A(ias upit 1e Jesus, 2aby 1e Jesus, 3u& 1e Jesus, )anaida 4o(anco, and 1e!etrio antos, de0endants, "i'i( "ase 5o. 5+2-#-00.

tille*, res$on*ent "lai0e* she was a lawful tenant thereof an* ha* 6een in a"tual $ossession when $etitioners 0ali"iousl2 fille* so with soil an* $ala2 hus7 on 8ul2 1 an* 2, 2000. Res$on*ent $ra2e* that $etitioners 6e hel* lia6le for a"tual *a0ages, 0oral *a0ages, exe0$lar2 *a0ages, litigation ex$enses an* attorne21s fees, an* "osts of the suit.

Petitioners file* a .otion to !is0iss, 8[8] whi"h was *enie* 62 the trial "ourt in an +r*er )[)] *ate* !e"e06er /, 2000. 9t hel* that it has :uris*i"tion over the "ase 6e"ause the allegations in the #o0$laint 0a*e a "lai0 for *a0ages, an* not an agrarian *is$ute whi"h shoul* 6e referre* to the !e$art0ent of Agrarian Refor0 A*:u*i"ation -oar* ;!ARA-<= an* that the #o0$laint was $ro$erl2 file* 6e"ause the #ertifi"ation of 'on-foru0 >ho$$ing was signe* 62 res$on*ent1s attorne2-in-fa"t.

Petitioners si0ultaneousl2 file* an Answer 10[10] to the "o0$laint an* a .otion for Re"onsi*eration 11[11] of the !e"e06er /, 2000 +r*er. ?owever, the "ourt a quo *enie*
*[*] Rollo, pp. 52-5+. .[.] Id. at -2--3. 10[10] Id. at ,1-,+. 11[11] Id. at -+--..

the 0otion for la"7 of 0erit in an +r*er 12[12] *ate* >e$te06er 10, 2001. issue* an +n 8anuar2 ), 2002, the trial "ourt *is0issing the "ase *ue to +r*er1,[1,]

res$on*ent1s failure to $rose"ute.

5ith

the

*enial1/[1/]

of

her

.otion

for

Re"onsi*eration,1([1(] res$on*ent inter$ose* an a$$eal to the #ourt of A$$eals whi"h ren*ere* the assaile* !e"ision *ate* August 28, 200 , the *is$ositive $ortion of whi"h states:

5?@R@A+R@, the a$$eal is here62 %RA'T@!. A""or*ingl2, the +r*er, *ate* 8anuar2 ), 2002, of the RT# [-ran"h 1 , .alolos] is here62 R@&@R>@! an* >@T A>9!@. Plaintiff-a$$ellant1s #o0$laint is here62 R@9'>TAT@! an* the "ase is here62 R@.A'!@! to the RT# [-ran"h 1 , .alolos] for further $ro"ee*ings. >+ +R!@R@!.13[13]

12[12] Id. at *0-*1. 13[13] Id. at *2. 1+[1+] Id. at *.-.0. 15[15] Id. at *3-*+. 1-[1-] Id. at 22-23.

The #ourt of A$$eals rule* that the trial "ourt erre* in fin*ing that the $arties faile* to ta7e ne"essar2 a"tion regar*ing the "ase 6e"ause the re"or*s $lainl2 show that $etitioners res$on*ent file* file* an an with Answer to the to "o0$laint, the Re: .otion Answer while for of +$$osition

Re"onsi*eration !efen*ants.1 [1 ]

.anifestation

5ith regar* to the or*er of the trial "ourt *is0issing the "o0$laint on the groun* of failure to $rose"ute, the a$$ellate "ourt hel* that the $revious a"ts of res$on*ent *o not 0anifest la"7 of interest to $rose"ute the "ase= that sin"e filing the #o0$laint, res$on*ent file* an +$$osition to $etitioners1 .otion to !is0iss, an Answer to $etitioners1 "ounter"lai0, an* a #o00ent to $etitioners1 .otion for Re"onsi*eration= that res$on*ent *i* not ignore $etitioners1 .otion to !is0iss nor *i* she re$eate*l2 fail to a$$ear 6efore the "ourt= that no su6stantial $re:u*i"e woul* 6e "ause* to $etitioners an* that stri"t a$$li"ation of the rule on *is0issal is un:ustifie* "onsi*ering the a6sen"e of $attern or s"he0e to *ela2 the *is$osition of the "ase on the $art of res$on*ent= an* that :usti"e woul* 6e 6etter serve* if the "ase is re0an*e* to the trial "ourt for further $ro"ee*ings an* final *is$osition.
1,[1,] Id. at *5-*,.

+n .ar"h 28, 2008, the #ourt of A$$eals *enie* $etitioners1 .otion for Re"onsi*eration= hen"e, this $etition 6ase* on the following groun*:

5?@T?@R +R '+T T?@ !@#9>9+' +A T?@ ?+'+RA-B@ #+CRT +A APP@AB> 9' #.A.-%.R. #& 'o. (0 ), 'CBB9AD9'% A'!E+R R@&@R>9'% A'!E+R >@TT9'% A>9!@ T?@ +R!@R> !AT@! 8A'CARD ), 2002 A'! .AD 8, 2002 9>>C@! -D T?@ RT#--CBA#A' 9' #9&9B #A>@ 'o. (/2-.-00, 9> #+'TRARD T+ BA5 A'! PR@&A9B9'% 8CR9>PRC!@'#@.

Petitioners allege that res$on*ent faile* to "o0$l2 with the 0an*ate of the 1)) Rules of #ivil Pro"e*ure to $ro0$tl2 0ove for the setting of the "ase for $re-trial= that Fheav2 $ressures of wor7G *oes not :ustif2 the failure to 0ove for the setting of the "ase for $re-trial= that the allegations in the #o0$laint whi"h $ertain to res$on*ent1s status as a tenant of @lena #. !e 8esus a0ount to foru0 sho$$ing that woul* extre0el2 $re:u*i"e the0. Petitioners thus $ra2 for the nullifi"ation of the !e"ision an* Resolution of the #ourt of A$$eals an* the affir0ation of the *is0issal of the #o0$laint 62 the trial "ourt.

The $etition la"7s 0erit.

The #ourt of A$$eals "orre"tl2 note* that $etitioners raise* the 0atter of res$on*ent1s allege* foru0 sho$$ing for the first ti0e onl2 in their .otion for Re"onsi*eration. 9ssues not $reviousl2 ventilate* "annot 6e raise* for the first ti0e on a$$eal,18[18] 0u"h less when first raise* in the 0otion for re"onsi*eration of a *e"ision of the a$$ellate "ourt.

At an2 rate, this #ourt *oes not fin* res$on*ent1s allegations in her "o0$laint in #ivil #ase 'o. (/2-.-00 to 6e "onstitutive of the ele0ents of foru0-sho$$ing. Res$on*ent 0erel2 *es"ri6e* herself as a tenant of $etitioners an* 0entione* that there was an unlawful *etainer "ase 1)[1)] involving the $ar"el of lan* whi"h is also involve* in the instant "ivil "ase for *a0ages.

There is foru0-sho$$ing when as a result of an a*verse *e"ision in one foru0, or in anti"i$ation thereof, a $art2 see7s a favora6le o$inion in another foru0 through 0eans
1*[1*] Rasdas v. Estenor, 6.7. 5o. 15,-05, 1ece!ber 13, 2005, +,, "7A 53*, 551. 1.[1.] Estate of Guillermo de Jesus and Elena C. De Jesus v. Carmen Cruz, and all persons claiming right under her, 4 "i'i( Action 5o. -5 0or 8n(a90u( 1etainer 9it/ :7;<=n>unction in #unicipa( :ria( "ourt o0 "a(u!pit, 2u(acan and "i'i( "ase 5o. 1013#-.. 0or 8n(a90u( 1etainer 9it/ :7;<=n>unction in 7egiona( :ria( "ourt o0 #a(o(os, 2ranc/ 1+.

other than a$$eal or certiorari. Aoru0-sho$$ing exists when two or 0ore a"tions involve the sa0e transa"tions, essential fa"ts, an* "ir"u0stan"es= an* raise i*enti"al "auses of a"tion, su6:e"t 0atter, an* issues. >till another test of foru0-sho$$ing is when the ele0ents of litis pendencia are $resent or where a final :u*g0ent in one "ase will a0ount to res judicata in another H whether in the two or 0ore $en*ing "ases, there is an i*entit2 of ;a< $arties ;or at least su"h $arties as re$resent the sa0e interests in 6oth a"tions<, ;6< rights or "auses of a"tion, an* ;"< reliefs sought. 20[20]

Although there is an i*entit2 of so0e of the $arties in the instant "ase for *a0ages an* the unlawful *etainer "ase, there is, however, no i*entit2 of reliefs $ra2e* for. The for0er is for re"over2 of *a0ages allege*l2 "ause* 62 $etitioners1 a"ts on res$on*ent1s $ala2 "ro$s= while the latter "ase involve* $ossessor2 an* tenan"2 rights of res$on*ent. As su"h, res$on*ent *i* not violate the rule on foru0-sho$$ing.

>e"tion 1, Rule 18 of the 1))

Rules of #ivil Pro"e*ure

i0$oses u$on the $laintiff the *ut2 to $ro0$tl2 0ove ex parte to have the "ase set for $re-trial after the last $lea*ing
20[20] National Electrification Administration NEA! v. "uenaventura , 6.7. 5o. 132+53, February 1+, 200*, 5+5 "7A 2,,, 2**-2*..

has 6een serve* an* file*. 1

21

.oreover, >e"tion ,, Rule

[21] $rovi*es that failure on the $art of the $laintiff to

"o0$l2 with sai* *ut2 without an2 :ustifia6le "ause 0a2 result to the *is0issal of the "o0$laint for failure to $rose"ute his a"tion for an unreasona6le length of ti0e or failure to "o0$l2 with the rules of $ro"e*ure.

9t 0ust 6e stresse* that even if the $laintiff fails to $ro0$tl2 0ove for $re-trial without an2 :ustifia6le "ause for su"h *ela2, the extre0e san"tion of *is0issal of the "o0$laint 0ight not 6e warrante* if no su6stantial $re:u*i"e woul* 6e "ause* to the *efen*ant, an* there are s$e"ial an* "o0$elling reasons whi"h woul* 0a7e the stri"t a$$li"ation of the rule "learl2 un:ustifie*.22[22]

9n the instant "ase, the #ourt of A$$eals "orre"tl2 hel* that the *is0issal of res$on*ent1s "o0$laint is too severe a san"tion for her failure to file a 0otion to set the "ase for $re-trial. 9t 0ust 6e $ointe* out that res$on*ent $rose"ute*
21[21] 783E ;F ";87:, 7u(e 1,, ec. 3? 1is!issa( due to 0au(t o0 p(ainti00. @ =0, 0or no >usti0iab(e cause, t/e p(ainti00 0ai(s to appear on t/e date o0 t/e presentation o0 /is e'idence in c/ie0 on t/e co!p(aint, or to prosecute /is action 0or an unreasonab(e (engt/ o0 ti!e, or to co!p(y 9it/ t/ese 7u(es or any order o0 t/e court, t/e co!p(aint !ay be dis!issed upon !otion o0 t/e de0endant or upon t/e courtAs o9n !otion, 9it/out pre>udice to t/e rig/t o0 t/e de0endant to prosecute /is counterc(ai! in t/e sa!e or in a separate action. :/is dis!issa( s/a(( /a'e t/e e00ect o0 an ad>udication upon t/e !erits, un(ess ot/er9ise dec(ared by t/e court. 22[22] #lave v. $istas, 6.7. 5o. 1551.3, 5o'e!ber 2-, 200+, +++ "7A +,., +.5.

her a"tion with ut0ost *iligen"e an* with reasona6le *is$at"h sin"e filing the "o0$laint H she file* an o$$osition to $etitioners1 0otion to *is0iss the "o0$laint= a "o00ent to $etitioners1 0otion for re"onsi*eration of the !e"e06er /, 2000 +r*er of the trial "ourt= an* an Answer to #ounter"lai0 of $etitioners. 5hen the trial "ourt issue* an or*er *is0issing the "ase, res$on*ent file* without *ela2 a 0otion for re"onsi*eration= an* u$on its *enial, she i00e*iatel2 file* a 'oti"e of A$$eal.2,[2,] .oreover, "ontrar2 to $etitioners1 "lai0 that res$on*ent was silent for one 2ear sin"e she file* her Answer to #ounter"lai0 until the trial "ourt1s *is0issal or*er,2/[2/] re"or*s show that 6etween sai* $erio*, 6oth $arties an* the trial "ourt were threshing out $etitioners1 0otion for re"onsi*eration of the !e"e06er /, 2000 +r*er.

5hile Fheav2 $ressures of wor7G was not "onsi*ere* a $ersuasive reason to :ustif2 the failure to set the "ase for $re-trial in Olave v. Mistas,2([2(] however, unli7e the res$on*ents in the sai* "ase, herein res$on*ent never faile* to "o0$l2 with the Rules of #ourt or an2 or*er of the trial "ourt at an2 other ti0e. Aailing to file a 0otion to set the
23[23] 7ecords, pp. ..-100. 2+[2+] Rollo, pp. 13*, 1+0, 1+2. 25[25] %upra note 22.

"ase for $re-trial was her first an* onl2 te"hni"al la$se *uring the entire $ro"ee*ings. 'either has she 0anifeste* an evi*ent $attern or a s"he0e to *ela2 the *is$osition of the "ase nor a wanton failure to o6serve the 0an*ator2 reIuire0ent of the rules. A""or*ingl2, the en*s of :usti"e an* fairness woul* 6est 6e serve* if the $arties are given the full o$$ortunit2 to litigate their "lai0s an* the real issues involve* in the "ase are threshe* out in a full-6lown trial. -esi*es, $etitioners woul* not 6e $re:u*i"e* shoul* the "ase $ro"ee* as the2 are not stri$$e* of an2 affir0ative *efenses nor *e$rive* of *ue $ro"ess of law.

This is not to sa2 that a*heren"e to the Rules "oul* 6e *is$ense* with. ?owever, exigen"ies an* situations 0ight o""asionall2 *e0an* flexi6ilit2 in their a$$li"ation. 23[23] 9n*ee*, on several o""asions, the #ourt relaxe* the rigi* a$$li"ation of the rules of $ro"e*ure to affor* the $arties o$$ortunit2 to full2 ventilate the 0erits of their "ases. This is in line with the ti0e-honore* $rin"i$le that "ases shoul* 6e *e"i*e* onl2 after giving all $arties the "han"e to argue their "auses an* *efenses. Te"hni"alit2 an* $ro"e*ural

2-[2-] Repu&lic of the 'hilippines v. #leta, G.R. No. 156606, August 17, 2007, 530 SCRA 534, 542.

i0$erfe"tion shoul* thus not serve as 6asis of *e"isions. 2 [2 ]

Ainall2, A... 'o. 0,-1-0)-># or the new Guidelines To Be Observed By Trial Court Judges And Clerks O Court !n T"e Conduct O #re$Trial And %se O &eposition$&iscovery Measures, whi"h too7 effe"t on August 13, 200/, ai0s to a66reviate "ourt $ro"ee*ings, ensure $ro0$t *is$osition of "ases an* *e"ongest the "ourt *o"7ets, an* lai* to further in i0$le0ent $re-trial gui*elines *own

A*0inistrative #ir"ular 'o. ,-))28[28] *ate* 8anuar2 1(, 1))). A... 'o. 0,-1-0)-># states that: F5ithin five ;(< *a2s fro0 *ate of filing of the re$l2, 2)[2)] the $laintiff 0ust $ro0$tl2 0ove ex parte that the "ase 6e set for $re-trial "onferen"e.,0[,0] 9f the $laintiff fails to file sai* 0otion of the within the given $erio*, the -ran"h #+# shall issue a noti"e of $re-trial.G As su"h, the "ler7 of "ourt of -ran"h 1 trial to the $arties an* set the "ase for $re-trial. Regional Trial #ourt of .alolos shoul* issue a noti"e of $re-

2,[2,] Cr(stal %hipping, Inc. v. Natividad, 6.7. 5o. 15+,.*, ;ctober 20, 2005, +,3 "7A 55., 5-5-5--. 2*[2*] trict ;bser'ance o0 ession Bours o0 :ria( "ourts and E00ecti'e #anage!ent o0 "ases to Ensure t/eir peedy 1isposition. 2. [2.] Ad!inistrati'e "ircu(ar 5o. 3-.. dated 15 January 1.... 30[30] 1.., 783E ;F "=$=3 47;"E187E, 7u(e 1*, ec. 1.

;HERE7ORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is DENIED. -ran"h 1 The August 28, 200 !e"ision of the #ourt of A$$eals in #A-%.R. #& 'o. (0 ), setting asi*e the +r*er of

of the Regional Trial #ourt of .alolos *is0issing

#ivil #ase 'o. (/2-.-2000 for res$on*ent1s failure to $rose"ute, an* its .ar"h 28, 2008 Resolution *en2ing $etitioners1 .otion for Re"onsi*eration are A77IR!ED. The "ler7 of "ourt of -ran"h 1 $arties. of the Regional Trial #ourt of .alolos is DIRECTED to issue a noti"e of $re-trial to the

SO ORDERED.

CONSUELO YNARES(SANTIAGO Asso"iate 8usti"e

;E CONCUR'

!A. ALICIA AUSTRIA(!ARTINEZ Asso"iate 8usti"e

!INITA V. CHICO(NAZARIO NACHURA Asso"iate 8usti"e 8usti"e

ANTONIO

EDUARDO Asso"iate

B.

DIOSDADO !. PERALTA Asso"iate 8usti"e

ATTESTATION

9 attest that the "on"lusions in the a6ove *e"ision were rea"he* in "onsultation 6efore the "ase was assigne* to the writer of the o$inion of the #ourt1s !ivision.

CONSUELO YNARES(SANTIAGO Asso"iate 8usti"e #hair$erson, Thir* !ivision

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to >e"tion 1,, Arti"le &999 of the #onstitution an* the !ivision #hair$erson1s Attestation, it is here62 "ertifie* that the "on"lusions in the a6ove !e"ision were rea"he* in "onsultation 6efore the "ase was assigne* to the writer of the o$inion of the #ourt1s !ivision.

REYNATO S. PUNO #hief 8usti"e