Source: http://lawlibrary.chanrobles.com/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=50125:gr-157856-2007&amp;catid=1496&amp;Itemid=566
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 08:18:55+00:00

Document:
G.R. No. 157856 - Concepcion C. Anillo v. Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems etc, et al.
CONCEPCION C. ANILLO of Barangay San Nicolas (formerly Molino), Bacoor, Cavite Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON THE SETTLEMENT OF LAND PROBLEMS represented by Commissioner ERNESTO A. CARDIÃ‘O; OIC-Associate Commissioner NOEL GALAROSA, DEMETRIO T. VILLANUEVA, JR., Sheriff IV of the Regional Trial Court, Fourth Judicial Region, Bacoor, Cavite; Provincial Director, PNP, Province of Cavite; National Police Task Force on Professional Squatters and Squatting Syndicates, Hon. Mayor JESSIE B. Promulgated: CASTILLO of the Municipality of Bacoor, Cavite; Hon. Barangay Chairman GAUDENCIO PAREDES; GREENVALLEY HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION INC.; and SOUTHRICH ACRES, INC. Respondents.
This is a special civil action under Rule 65 for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with application for a writ of preliminary injunction and restraining order, praying for the nullification of the Resolution1 dated 30 July 2001, including the writ of execution2 and demolition3 in connection therewith, for having been issued by the Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP) with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction.
The instant controversy stemmed from a letter4 dated 29 May 2001 of Jessie B. Castillo, Municipal Mayor of Bacoor, Cavite, to COSLAP Commissioner Ernesto A. CardiÃ±o, seeking immediate assistance in the settlement of a land dispute brewing in Green Valley Subdivision, San Nicolas, Bacoor, Cavite. The letter averred that squatters, claiming to have bought portions of the subdivision land from the estate of the late Don Hermogenes Rodriguez, had invaded the subdivision and turned vacant lots therein into a squatter colony. A certain Henry Rodriguez had been purportedly representing the estate and claiming ownership over a big portion of the Municipality of Bacoor including the subdivision land by virtue of a Spanish title, and selling small lots to clueless victims. Armed security guards were allegedly preventing registered owners and legitimate residents of the subdivision from entering their own property and exacting money from them in exchange for the peaceful occupation thereof. The complaint was docketed as COSLAP Case No. 2001-05-46.
Acting on the complaint, COSLAP directed the parties to participate in a series of mediation conferences. On 29 June 2001, Atty. Larry Pernito appeared on behalf of the Estate of Rodriguez. He questioned the jurisdiction of COSLAP and argued that the matter had already been settled in the intestate proceedings for the settlement of the Estate of Rodriguez. The representatives of Green Valley Homeowners Association, Inc. and Southrich Acres, Inc., registered owners of lots within the subdivision, prayed that their Torrens titles be respected. At the next conference, only complainants appeared. COSLAP directed the parties to submit position papers, but only complainants complied.
C. Collecting fees from persons for "rights" to occupy said lots and selling lots to innocent purchasers.
COSLAP affirmed its jurisdiction over the land dispute on the ground that the dispute would fall under the all-inclusive proviso of Paragraph 2, Section 3 of Executive Order No. 561,7 which created the commission.
Upon motion, COSLAP issued a Writ of Execution8 on 23 October 2001, directing the Sheriff of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bacoor, with the assistance of the Cavite Provincial Director of the Philippine National Police, to implement its Resolution dated 30 July 2001. Edwin A. San Miguel, Sheriff IV of the RTC-Bacoor, filed a Sheriff's Report stating that he served copies of the writ and a ten-day notice to vacate9 to the squatters but the latter refused to leave and remove the structures.
On 21 January 2002, a Rule 47 petition, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 68640, was filed with the Court of Appeals by a certain Eduardo Cabesa Abear and 106 others included as petitioners. Named respondents in said petition, which sought to nullify the COSLAP Resolution dated 30 July 2001, were Green Valley Homeowners Association, Inc., South Rich Acres Inc. and COSLAP.
On 4 February 2002, the Court of Appeals issued a Resolution10 in the said case, denying the petition on grounds of improper remedy and lack of jurisdiction.
Because the writ of execution was returned unsatisfied and in view of the finality of the Court of Appeals' resolution, COSLAP issued a Writ of Demolition11 on 29 January 2003 directing Sheriff San Miguel to remove the structures and improvements illegally constructed within Green Valley.
On 30 April 2003, petitioner filed the instant petition13 for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, with a prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and a writ of preliminary injunction. Named respondents are the COSLAP, represented by Commissioners Ernesto A. CardiÃ±o and Noel Galarosa, the Sheriff of the RTC of Bacoor, the PNP Provincial Director of Cavite, the National Police Task Force on Professional Squatters and Squatting Syndicates, Bacoor Mayor Jessie B. Castillo, Barangay Chairman Gaudencio Paredes, Green Valley Homeowners Association, Inc. and South Rich Acres Inc.
A. PUBLIC RESPONDENT COSLAP, REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER ERNESTO A. CARDIÃ‘O AND OIC-ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONER NOEL A. GALAROSA, HAS NO JURISDICTION OVER COSLAP CASE NO. 2001-05-46 AND THE RESOLUTION DATED JULY 30, 2001 WAS ISSUED WITH GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR IN [sic] EXCESS OF JURISDICTION AND EXTRINSIC FRAUD.
B. PETITIONER WERE [sic] DENIED OF DUE PROCESS OF LAW AND SHE WAS NEVER MADE PARTY TO COSLAP CASE NO. 2001-05-46 AND WAS NOT GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD TO REFUTE AND CHALLENGE THE ALLEGATIONS STIPULATED IN THE COMPLAINT.
Petitioner insists that COSLAP did not acquire jurisdiction over her person because she was not made party to the case before the said commission.
The records belie petitioner's claim.
Even before COSLAP conducted the series of mediation conferences, it sent through registered mail notices to persons, including herein petitioner, claiming ownership rights derived from the Estate of Rodriguez, directing them to appear at the mediation conference. At the first scheduled mediation conference, a certain Atty. Larry Pernito appeared on behalf of the Estate of Rodriguez, questioning the jurisdiction of COSLAP. He was the same counsel who represented the petitioners in CA-G.R. SP No. 68640 who eventually sought, albeit unsuccessfully, the nullification of the COSLAP resolution being assailed in the instant petition. COSLAP likewise gave both parties the opportunity to present their claims when it directed them to submit their respective position papers. Respondents therein and Atty. Pernito, however, failed to appear in subsequent proceedings or to submit any position paper.
Petitioner cannot disavow and in fact does not even disown the authority of Atty. Pernito to represent the Estate of Rodriguez or deny knowledge that said lawyer was representing the Estate of Rodriguez. The records show that in the various notarized documents purportedly authorizing their holders to occupy portions of the disputed property, petitioner was a signatory therein as one of the witnesses whereas Atty. Pernito, described therein as "Chief Legal Counsel of the Rodriguez Estate," attested to the execution. These documents were executed between January and October 2001, or exactly during the pendency of the COSLAP proceedings. Petitioner's claim that she was totally uninformed about the proceedings before the COSLAP is not worthy of belief. On the contrary, petitioner is deemed constructively notified of the said proceedings.
The Court of Appeals' resolution in CA-G.R. SP No. 68640 amounts to res judicata in this case. The petition in CA-G.R. SP No. 68640 also sought the annulment of COSLAP Case No. 2001-05-46, the same proceedings being assailed in this petition by parties claiming ownership rights derived from the Estate of Rodriguez. Under the doctrine of res judicata, the dismissal of said petition effectively foreclosed the right of petitioner or any person claiming ownership rights under the Estate of Rodriguez to institute a subsequent action to nullify the proceedings in COSLAP Case No. 2001-05-46.
It is no longer necessary to resolve the question of jurisdiction of COSLAP.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED. The temporary restraining order dated 29 September 2003 issued by the Court is LIFTED. Costs against petitioner.
18 Ouano v. PGTT International Investment Corp., 434 Phil. 28, 34 (2002).
19 Paradero v. Abrogan, G.R. No. 158917, 1 March 2004, 424 SCRA 155, 163.
20 Ouano v. PGTT International Investment Corp., supra.
21 Paradero v. Abragan. supra.
22 417 Phil. 378 (2001).
23 448 Phil. 823 (2003).
24 Supra note 13 at 393-394.
25 Casimiro v. Tandog, G.R. No. 146137, 8 June 2005, 459 SCRA 624, 631.
26 Lanuza v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 131394, 28 March 2005, 454 SCRA 54, 61.
27 Lazaro v. Court of Appeals, 386 Phil. 412, 417 (2000).
28 Balindong v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159962, December 16, 2004, 447 SCRA 200, 212.
29 Heirs of Lourdes Padilla v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 147205, March 10, 2004, 425 SCRA 236, 242.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.