7/21/2016

G.R.No.L260

TodayisThursday,July21,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.L260March25,1946
FELIPESAAVEDRA,petitioner,
vs.
POTENCIANOPECSON,JudgeofFirstInstanceofZamboanga,respondent.
AtilanoandAtilanoforpetitioner.
RespondentJudgeinhisownbehalf.
PERFECTO,J.:
OnDecember18,1945,ValerianoTurijafiledinthemunicipalcourtofZamboangaacomplaintfortherecoveryof
anautomobilevaluedatP450againstpetitionerFelipeSaavedra,whoacquiredthesamefromArthurD.Walker,
an American enlisted man, said car belonging to the plaintiff from whom it was seized and appropriated by the
Japaneseforcesduringtheenemyoccupationand,aftertheliberation,hadbeeninthepossessionandcontrolof
thePCAUbeforeitstransferbyArthurD.Walkertopetitioner.
Petitionerfiledamotiontodismissthecomplaintonthegroundthatthemunicipalcourthasnojurisdictionover
thesubjectmatteroftheaction,forthereasonthatthecarhaslostitscharacterasprivatepropertytotakeonthe
statusofenemystatepropertyand,therefore,theclaimandadjudicationofthesameshouldbemadeinandby
theOfficeoftheCustodianofEnemyPropertyestablishedbytheUnitedStatesGovernmentinZamboanga.On
January 2, 1946, the municipal court, declaring itself without jurisdiction, ordered the dismissal of the case. On
January3,1946,theplaintiffappealed.
After both parties were given ample opportunity to present their oral arguments in support of their respective
contentionsonthequestionofthejurisdictionofthemunicipalcourt,theHonorablePotencianoPecson,Judgeof
theCourtofFirstInstanceofZamboanga,issuedonJanuary7,1946,anorderreversingtheorderofdismissalof
themunicipalcourt,declaringitwithjurisdictiontotrythecase,andremandingthesameforfurtherproceedings,
withoutcosts.OnJanuary9,1946,petitionermovedforreconsiderationofsaidorderofJanuary7,butthemotion
wasdeniedonJanuary11.
NowpetitionercomestoustoseektheannullmentoftheorderoftherespondentjudgedatedJanuary7,1946,
ashavingbeenissuedinexcessofhisjurisdiction.
Wedonotfindanymeritinpetitioner'scontention.
It appearing that the complaint for the recovery of the automobile in question has been disposed of by the
municipalcourtofZamboangauponaquestionoflawandnotuponatrialonthemerits,therespondentjudge
hasjurisdictiontoissuetheorderdatedJanuary7,1946,inaccordancewithsection10ofRule40oftheRulesof
Court,whichreadsasfollows:
SEC.10.AppellatepowersofCourtsofFirstInstancewhereactionnottriedonitsmeritsbyinferiorcourts.
Wheretheactionhasbeendisposedofbyaninferiorcourtuponaquestionoflawandnotafteravalid
trialuponthemerits,theCourtofFirstInstanceshallonappealreviewtherulingoftheinferiorcourtand
mayaffirmorreverseit,asthecasemaybe.Incaseofreversal,thecaseshallberemandedforfurther
proceedings.
Whether respondent acted correctly or not in issuing said order, the proper remedy for petitioner would be by
appeal.Butintheinstantcase,itappearsthatanappealagainsttheorderwouldbefutilebecausetheorderis
welltaken as the municipal court, without any shadow of doubt, has jurisdiction to decided the litigation on the
merits, it appearing that the value of the litigated personal property is within the range of the concurrent
jurisdictionbetweenacourtoffirstinstanceandamunicipalcourt.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1946/mar1946/gr_l260_1946.html

1/2

7/21/2016

G.R.No.L260

Petitioner'scontentionthat,becausethepropertyhadbeenappropriatedbytheJapaneseforcesduringenemy
occupation,theautomobilehaslostitscharacterasprivatepropertytotakeonthestatusofenemystateproperty,
lacksmerit.TheillegalseizuremadebytheJapanesecouldnot,andcannot,changethenature,character,and
statusofapropertylegallybelongingtoacivilianprivatecitizen.Petitionerwhoisinpossessionoftheautomobile
inquestionappearsalsotobeaprivatecitizen,residinginthedistrictofTetuan,ZamboangaCity.Thelitigationis,
therefore,betweentwoprivatecitizens,bothresidingwithintheterritorialjurisdictionofthemunicipalcourt,and
thereisnothingtoshowthattheautomobileisnotwithinthejurisdictionofsaidcourt.
Petitionisdismissed,withcoststobetaxedagainstpetitioner.
Moran,C.J.,Ozaeta,Paras,Jaranilla,Feria,DeJoya,Pablo,Hilado,Bengzon,andBriones,JJ.,concur.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1946/mar1946/gr_l260_1946.html

2/2