Bernabe v.
Vergara o Jurisdiction over the subject-matter is the power to hear and
G.R. No. L-48652 | 16 Sep 1942 | Moran, J.
Facts:
 Victoriano Zafra died, survived by 3 children, namely, Benito,
Apolonia, and Dominga Zafra
 Benito and Apolonia are both deceased and their heirs instituted an
action for partition of Victoriano's estate
 RESPs, Dominga and certain persons to whom she had sold her share
of the estate, interposed a counterclaim that Dominga had paid certain
debts contracted by Apolonia, which constitutes an equitable lien on
Apolonia's estate
 The trial court rendered a judgment awarding the heirs of Apolonia a
third of Victoriano's estate and at the same time, ordered them to pay
Apolonia's debts amounting to Php 350.00
 PETs, the heirs of Apolonia, now question the jurisdiction of the trial
court to order the payment of the Php 350.00
 Upon appeal, CA ordered the case be elevated to the SC
Issue:
1. W/N the trial court has jurisdiction to order the heirs of Apolonia to
pay the Php 350. YES.
Ratio:
 The trial court has subject matter jurisdiction over the case, but the
issue of jurisdiction over the issue must be remanded to the CA.
o The trial court had jurisdiction as there was a counterclaim
wherein the amount adjudged was within the amount pleaded
o Also, the proceeding was in the nature of one for liquidation
and partition of inheritance, wherein debts left by deceased
ancestors may be determined and ordered paid if the creditors
are parties
o In any case, the heirs of Apolonia failed to object to the
exercise of jurisdiction of the trial court and the same court
ruled upon the issue of jurisdiction by implication when it
tried and decided on the case.
 Citing Reyes v. Diaz:
determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings
in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority
which organizes the court and defines the court and defines its
powers
o The question of W/N a court has jurisdiction over the subject-
matter calls for interpretation and application of the law of
jurisdiction
o But in some instances it is said that the court should also have
jurisdiction over the issue, meaning the issue being tried and
decided by the court be within the issues raised in the
pleadings
o But this kind of jurisdiction should be distinguished from
jurisdiction over the subject matter, the latter being
conferred by law and the former by the pleadings.
Jurisdiction over the issue, unlike jurisdiction over the
subject-matter, may be conferred by consent either express
or implied of the parties.
o Although an issue is not duly pleaded it may validly be tried
and decided if no timely objection is made thereto by the
parties. This cannot be done when jurisdiction over the
subject-matter is involved.
o Jurisdiction over the issue is an expression of a principle
involved in jurisdiction over the persons of the parties
o At any rate, W/N the court has jurisdiction over a specific
issue is a question that only requires examination of the
pleadings, and this does not need SC’s intervention
 As this case involves an amount of Php 200 or more, it falls within the
jurisdiction of the CFI
 The kind of jurisdiction put in issue is actually not over subject matter
but jurisdiction over the issue or over the persons of the parties
o Thus, the question of jurisdiction raised is not only
unmeritorious but also not the kind of question that may
deprive the CA of its appellate jurisdiction over the case
Petition DISMISSED. Case REMANDED to CA for hearing and decision
on merits.