Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
SUPREME COURT
Manila
-- VERSUS –
X-------------------------------------------------X
THE PARTIES
TIMELINESS OF PETITION
On January 18, 2017or within the 15-day period from receipt of said
decision stated in ANNEX "A", petitioner filed his motion for
reconsideration of said decision, copy of which motion for reconsideration
is attached hereto as ANNEX "B".
This instant petition is filed within the 15-day period from receipt on
January 31, 2017 denying the motion for reconsideration.
4. The second demand letter was not heeded by respondent, as the amount
due December 15, 2015 remained unpaid;
6. Despite repeated demands, both verbal and written, respondent failed and
continues to fail to settle his obligations to herein petitioner, to the prejudice
of the latter;
8. On January 14, 2017, the RTC Br. 13 rendered a judgment ruling in favor
of respondents, which petitioner received on January 16, 2017, which
decision is herein attached as ANNEX "H";
9. On January 18, 2017, Petitionert filed a motion for reconsideration,
herein attached as ANNEX "I";
10. On January 20, 2017, petitioner received the order of the RTC
Br. 13 of Cotabato City Denying the motion for reconsideration of
petitioner, herein attached as ANNEX "J";
11. On February 23, 2017, the Court of Appeals denied the motion for
reconsideration through a second resolution, holding that the motion raise
no new issues or substantial ground that would merit the reconsideration of
the court petitioner filed motion for reconsideration, herein attached as
ANNEX "K";
12. On March 1, 2017, petitioner filed this instant petition for review under
Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
ISSUES RAISED
2. Allegation raised questions of fact and law, which should have been
threshed out during trial, when both parties have been given the
chance to present evidence supporting their allegation respective
allegations.
DISCUSSION
1. On January 16, 2017, herein petitioner received the order to the Regional
Trial Court, Br. 13 of Cotabato City denying the latter's motion for
reconsideration with regards the order of the aforesaid court dated January
14, 2017, petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration over the same
which the trial court denied in its order received by petitioner on January 20,
2017. On January 30 or 15 days after the receipt of the order denying the
motion for reconsideration herein petitioner filed this instant petition for
review under Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure.
4. The petitioner's rights to his property were violated when the trial court
ignored the substantial and overwhelming evidence against the respondent -
contrary to Articles 19, 20 and 21 of the New Civil Code.
PRAYER
B. Cost of suits.
4. Petitioner likewise prays for other reliefs deemed just and equitable in the
premises are similarly prayed for.
X-----------------------------X
ROCO M. SANCHEZ
Affiant/Petitioner
LTO ID No. N27-02-006784