Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 2

YBIERNAS VS.

TANCO-GABALDON et al on the TCT serves as notice to the whole world that the
G.R. No. 178925 property is no longer owned by Estrella.
June 01, 2011
Petitioners filed a motion for summary judgment. The Bacolod
FACTS: Estrella Ybiernas owned a parcel of land located in RTC initially denied the motion. Upon petitioners MR, the
Talisay, Negros Occidental covered by a TCT. She executed a Bacolod RTC granted the motion for summary judgment, the
Deed of Absolute Sale over the property in favor of her heirs, dispositive portion of which reads:
one of them is Dionisio Ybiernas.
The levy on attachment made by herein defendant Sheriff of
On June 30, 1989, Bacolod RTC issued an Order in Cadastral RTC.. Pasig City on said TCT.. issued by the RD of the
Case No. 10, directing the registration and annotation of the Province of Negros Occidental, covering the Subject Property,
Deed of Absolute Sale on the title. Thus, the Deed of Absolute is hereby DECLARED INVALID; and, consequently,
Sale and the said RTC Order were annotated on the title. [the] Entry .. on the same TCT .. is hereby CANCELLED and
[Neither the defendants nor anyone else has challenged the DISSOLVED.
validity of the mentioned judicial proceedings before the RTC.]
Respondents filed a notice of appeal, and it was granted by
Respondents Tanco-Gabaldon and Manila Bay Spinning Mills, the RTC. While the appeal was pending in the CA,
Inc. filed with the Pasig RTC a Complaint for sum of money respondents filed an MNT, claiming that they have discovered
and damages against Estrella and three other individuals. that the Cadastral Case did not exist and the Deed of Sale
Upon respondents motion, the Pasig RTC ordered the was simulated.
issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment upon filing of a
bond. The sheriff issued the corresponding writ of attachment The CA granted respondents MNT. The CA denied
and levied the subject property. When Estrellas heirs learned petitioners MR. Petitioners subsequently filed this petition for
about the levy, Dionisio filed an Affidavit of Third-Party Claim, review on certiorari (45)
asserting the transfer of ownership to them.
ISSUE:
The Pasig RTC resolved the Complaint for sum of money in
favor of respondents, and Estrella, et al. were ordered to pay. WON the RTC judgment is a final judgment

In the meantime, Dionisio died and was succeeded by his WON MNT could be allowed
heirs. Petitioners filed with the Bacolod RTC a Complaint for
Quieting of Title and Damages, claiming that the levy was HELD: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition
invalid because the property is not owned by any of the is DENIED. The CA Resolutions are AFFIRMED.
defendants in the Pasig RTC case. They averred that the
annotation of the RTC Order and the Deed of Absolute Sale YES;
Only a final judgment or order, as opposed to an interlocutory diligence;
order, may be the subject of a MNT. (3) that it is material, not merely cumulative, corroborative, or
impeaching; and
A summary judgment is granted to settle expeditiously a case (4) the evidence is of such weight that it would probably
if, on motion of either party, there appears from the pleadings, change the judgment if admitted.
depositions, admissions, and affidavits that no important
issues of fact are involved, except the amount of If the alleged newly discovered evidence could have been very
damages. The RTC judgment in this case fully determined the well presented during the trial with the exercise of reasonable
rights and obligations of the parties relative to the case for diligence, the same cannot be considered newly discovered.
quieting of title and left no other issue unresolved, except the
amount of damages. Hence, it is a final judgment. The only contentious element in the case is whether the
evidence could have been discovered with the exercise of
Here, the trial court, in stating that except as to the amount of reasonable diligence. The Rules do not give an exact definition
damages, a summary judgment is hereby rendered in favor of of due diligence, and whether the movant has exercised due
the plaintiffs and against the defendants, had, diligence depends upon the particular circumstances of each
in effect, resolved all issues, including the right to damages case. Nonetheless, it has been observed that the phrase is
in favor of the plaintiffs (petitioners). What remained often equated with reasonable promptness to avoid prejudice
undetermined was only the amount of damages. to the defendant. In other words, the concept of due diligence
has both a time component and a good faith component.
YES; We find that a new trial based on newly discovered
evidence is warranted. The Rules allows the courts to grant a On the second requisite, respondents explained that they
new trial when there are errors of law or irregularities could not have discovered the evidence with reasonable
prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused committed diligence because they relied in good faith on the veracity of
during the trial, or when there exists newly discovered the RTC Order dated June 30, 1989, based on the principle
evidence. The grant or denial of a new trial is, generally that the issuance of a court order, as an act of a public officer,
speaking, addressed to the sound discretion of the court which enjoys the presumption of regularity
cannot be interfered with unless a clear abuse thereof is
shown. As previously stated, respondents relied in good faith on the
veracity of the Bacolod RTC Order which petitioners presented
This Court has repeatedly held that before a new trial may be in court. It was only practical for them to do so, if only to
granted on the ground of newly discovered evidence, it must expedite the proceedings. Given this circumstance, we hold
be shown that respondents exercised reasonable diligence in obtaining
the evidence. The certifications therefore qualify as newly
(1) that the evidence was discovered after trial; discovered evidence.
(2) that such evidence could not have been discovered and
produced at the trial even with the exercise of reasonable