G.R. NO. 140086 - TEOVILLE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., VS. EDWARD L. FERREIRA, REAM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND GUILLERMO BUENAVENTURA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Office a quo dated July 10, 1994, is hereby SET ASIDE and new decision entered: Declaring the re-subdivision of the former Lot No. 98, Teoville Subdivision, Parañaque, as null and void; Declaring the sale of Lot No. 98-A to respondent Edward L. Ferreira as null and void; Ordering respondent Ream to execute a deed of donation over Lot No. 98-A in favor of the complainant; and Ordering respondent Ream to pay this Board the administrative fine in the amount of P10,000.00 pursuant to Section 22, in relation to Section 38 of P.D. 957. The Registry of Deeds of Pasay City therefore is hereby directed to cancel TCT No. 102423 (Lot No. 98-A), to restore the previous title thereon, and to annotate thereon that the same is open space for community facilities, and may not be sold or converted into another use without the approval of this Board. Let a copy of this decision be furnished the Registry of Deeds of Pasay City for its information and appropriate action. [11] Ferreira filed a motion for reconsideration praying that the decision of the HLURB Board of Commissioners be set aside and that the decision of Arbiter Dean be reinstated and affirmed in toto . In a resolution dated 27 September 1996, the HLURB Board of Commissioners, Special Division, set aside the 21 May 1996 decision of the HLURB Board of Commissioners and held that REAM had the right to re-subdivide Lot 98 without prior clearance from the HLURB because there was no more facility for public use set up therein and further held that since REAM expressed willingness to donate Lot 98-B to Teoville, the HLURB Board of Commissioners "can only go so far as directing REAM to comply with its voluntary undertaking." [12] Teoville filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was denied by the Special Division of the HLURB Board of Commissioners in a resolution dated 15 January 1997 on the ground that the water system in Lot 98 was no longer functioning. Teoville elevated the case to the Office of the President (O.P.), docketed as O.P. Case No. 97-C-7086. In a decision [13] of the O.P. dated 06 March 1998, the appeal of Teoville was ordered dismissed and the resolutions of the HLURB Board of Commissioners, Special Division, dated 27 September 1996 and 15 January 1997 were affirmed in toto. [14] Teoville filed a Petition for Review [15] before the Court of Appeals praying that the Court of Appeals reverse and set aside the decision of the O.P. dated 06 March 1998 and affirm in toto the decision of the HLURB Board of Commissioners, Special Division, dated 21 May 1996. In a resolution of the Court of Appeals dated 10 June 1998, [16] the petition was ordered dismissed by virtue of Section 7, Rule 43 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court of Appeals held: Considering that the certification of non-forum shopping was executed by petitioner's counsel Atty. Antonio G. Conde, instead of the petitioner's authorized corporate official, in clear contravention of Section 5, Rule 7