Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
FACTS:
1. Respondent Jose Belo filed with the CFI of Capiz, presided by
Judge Aligaen a verified petition captioned injunction with
Preliminary Injunction naming as respondents therein Director of
Bureau of Telecommunications with station in Iloilo City and their
agents acting in their behalf, Chief Operator Alagbay of BOT in
Roxas City.
Belo contended that he was granted a franchise to operate
a telephone system in Roxas and in Capiz.
BOTe started to establish, maintain and operate in the
same geographical area of Roxas City another local
telephone system which would directly compete with and
prejudice the telephone system he already established.
2. Judge Aligaen entered an order authorizing the issuance of writ
of preliminary injunction upon Belos posting a bond and
accordingly the writ was issued. It restrained therein respondents
from further establishing and operating the telephone lines.
3. Belo filed with the CFI of Capiz an urgent motion to declare
Alagbay and his agents in contempt of court because despite of
the injunction they continued the work of installing the new
telephone system in Roxas. The complaint was amended to
include the Director of Bureau of Telecommunications and the
Regional Director.
4. DBT then filed a joint motion for dissolution of the writ of
injunction, offering to put up a counterbond in the sum of
P20000.
5. After the CFIs denial of the MTD filed by the DBT, et al, DBT filed
petition for a writ of certiorari and prohibition with preliminary
injunction praying that pending the determination of the case on
the merits, a writ of preliminary injunction be issued ex parte and
without bond, restraining Judge Aligaen, from enforcing the ff: (1)
Writ of preliminary injunction; (2) Order holding Alagbay and his
agents in contempt.
6. The writ was granted.
7. Hence, this petition.
ISSUE:
HELD:
1. YES. THE ISSUANCE OF WIRT OF PRELIMINARY IN
JUNCTION IS WITHIN THE TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF
THE CFI OF CAPIZ. CFI of Capiz has jurisdiction to issue the writ
of preliminary injunction. In the instant case, the acts relative to
the establishment of a local telephone system by petitioners
were being done within the territorial boundaries of the province
or district of respondent court, and so said court had jurisdiction
to restrain them by injunction. It does not matter that some of
the respondents in the trial court, against whom the injunctive
order was issued, had their official residences outside the
territorial jurisdiction of the trial court.
Since the acts to be restrained were being done in Roxas
City, or within the territorial jurisdiction of respondent
court, the latter had jurisdiction to restrain said acts even if
the office of respondent Director of the Bureau of
Telecommunications is in Manila and the office of the
Regional Superintendent is in Iloilo City.