7/25/2019 Digest 2 Lack of Jurisdiction v. Exercise of Jurisdiction

1/1

LACK OF JURISDICTION V. EXERCISE OF JURISDICTION

CASE DIGEST CIV PRO:

Statement of the Case: This is a petition for revie on certiorariof the De!ision of the Co"rt ofAppea#s that $e!#are$ that a petition for ann"#%ent of &"$'%ent !annot (e avai#e$ of hen the

petitioner ha$ a#rea$) fi#e$ an appea# "n$er R"#e *+ of the R"#es of Co"rt. The petitioners are ,eirsof -a"ra So na%e#) /an La% Li% Ji%%) So Li% an$ Fer$inan$ So Li%. The respon$ents areL"!i#a Jo%o! O(#ios!a E#vira Jo%o! 0ar$ina( an$ ,eirs of A("n$ia Jo%o! 1a#a#a na%e#) Rosita1a#a#a A!enas Evan'e#ine 1a#a#a 1aa!#o O#iver Jo%o! 1a#a#a an$ 2er#a 1a#a#a Con$esa.

Facts: Jomocs heirs sold a arcel of land the! inherited from Pantaleon Jomoc toPetitioners" After etitioners ha#e made artial a!ment thereto$ said heirse%ec&ted another sale in fa#o&r of Ss" 'im" Petitioners so&(ht the deli#er! of theinstr&ments of con#e!ance to )hich the lo)er co&rt (ranted" Resondents no)in#o*e their ri(ht to le(al redemtion on the (ro&nd that the! did not sell theirshares to the arcel of land hence$ the! remain co+o)ners thereof and are entitledto reco#er entire roert! from Petitioners" Resodents s&ccessf&ll! reco#ered the

roert!" Petitioners no) ,les a etition for re#ie) &nder r&le -. assailin( the a)ard(i#en /! the trial co&rt and s&/se0&entl! ,les a etition for ann&lment of 1&d(ment$/oth /efore the CA"

Iss&e2s: Did the RTC a!te$ itho"t &"ris$i!tion hen it ren$ere$ the Reso#"tion hi!h re!o'ni3e$respon$ents4 ri'ht to re$ee% the propert) (e!a"se this in effe!t a%en$e$ the De!ision of theS"pre%e Co"rt hi!h s"staine$ the sa#e of the propert) to -a"ra So5

R&lin(: 3es$ 2etitioners !#ear#) !onf"se$ #a!6 of &"ris$i!tion ith error in the e7er!ise of&"ris$i!tion. J"ris$i!tion is not the sa%e as the e7er!ise of &"ris$i!tion. As $istin'"ishe$ fro% the

e7er!ise of &"ris$i!tion &"ris$i!tion is the a"thorit) to $e!i$e a !ase an$ not the $e!ision ren$ere$

therein. 8here there is &"ris$i!tion over the person an$ the s"(&e!t %atter the $e!ision on a## other

9"estions arisin' in the !ase is ("t an e7er!ise of s"!h &"ris$i!tion. An$ the errors hi!h the !o"rt

%a) !o%%it in the e7er!ise of &"ris$i!tion are %ere#) errors of &"$'%ent hi!h are the proper s"(&e!t

of an appea#.:;The error raise$ () petitioners pertains to the tria# !o"rt4s e7er!ise of its &"ris$i!tion

not its #a!6 of a"thorit) to $e!i$e the !ase. In a petition for ann"#%ent of &"$'%ent (ase$ on #a!6 of

&"ris$i!tion petitioner %"st sho not %ere#) an a("se of &"ris$i!tiona# $is!retion ("t an a(so#"te #a!6

of a"thorit) to hear an$ $e!i$e the !ase. On this (asis there o"#$ (e no va#i$ 'ro"n$ to 'rant the

petition for ann"#%ent of &"$'%ent.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2008/jan2008/gr_147082_2008.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2008/jan2008/gr_147082_2008.html#fnt21