Back to Search
JurisprudenceG.R. NO. 164529 -

G.R. NO. 164529 - FELIX DE GUZMAN OCAMPO, REPRESENTED BY GEORGE BUTLER, JR., VS. ALICIA SISON VDA. DE FERNANDEZ AND LETICIA S. FERNANDEZ.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Cited Laws

RA 785RA 377,RA 117RA 681RA 742,RA 63RA 144,RA 108RA 78RA 236,RA 735RA 814,RA 136
Share:

TL;DR — Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the application for Writ of Preliminary Injunction is hereby GRANTED, directing the [respondents Alicia and Leticia] and all persons claiming rights under them, The Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 43, its Sheriff and the Office of the Sheriff of Quezon City and the Register of Deeds to stop and/or desist from implementing the "Second Notice to Vacate the Premises" and/or Writ of Execution pending resolution of the main case, upon posting of a bond …

Decision

Ruling

Accordingly, the [respondents Alicia and Leticia], as well as [MeTC], Branch 43, its Sheriff and the Office of the Sheriff of Quezon City, Office of the Clerk of Court of Quezon City and the Register of Deeds are hereby DIRECTED to stop and/or desist from implementing the "Second Notice to Vacate the Premises" and/or Writ of Execution until and after this Court has heard the main case on the preliminary injunction. The RTC, in the same Order, gave the parties the option of either presenting evidence at a hearing or filing supporting pleadings on the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction; thereafter, the issue shall be considered submitted for resolution. In compliance with this Order, petitioner Felix and respondents Alicia and Leticia filed their Position Paper and Memorandum, respectively, and on 11 November 2002, the RTC issued another Order, [20] this time, granting petitioner Felix's prayer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction, thus For consideration of this Court in resolving the matter of the issuance of the writ of preliminary injunction is the question on whether or not [petitioner Felix/representative George, Jr.] have the clear and unmistakable rights that will be violated in the event the enforcement of the Writ of Execution issued by the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 41 [ sic ] is pushed through. Inasmuch as the issue before this Court is the alleged spurious and irregular transaction involving the alleged sale of the subject property, and considering that the ejectment case before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 41 [ sic ] involves only possession and not ownership, logic and prudence call for the maintenance of the status quo between the parties until after the case is decided on the merits. To avoid any miscarriage of justice and injury to [herein petitioner Felix/representative George, Jr.], and considering that the title of the [herein respondents Alicia and Leticia] are [sic] now being assailed in this instant case, this Court is impelled under the premises to GRANT the prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction. WHEREFORE, premises considered, the application for Writ of Preliminary Injunction is hereby GRANTED, directing the [respondents Alicia and Leticia] and all persons claiming rights under them, The Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 43, its Sheriff and the Office of the Sheriff of Quezon City and the Register of Deeds to stop and/or desist from implementing the "Second Notice to Vacate the Premises" and/or Writ of Execution pending resolution of the main case, upon posting of a bond in the amount of FIVE HUNDERED THOUSAND (P500,000.00) PESOS pursuant to Section 4, Rule 58, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. The RTC, in an Order, dated 25 March 2003, [21] denied respondents Alicia and Leticia's Motion for Reconsideration of its Order dated 11 November 2002. Aggrieved, respondents Alicia and Leticia filed before the Court of Appeals a Petition for Ce