G. R. No.

145169 - May 13, 2004

SIENA REALTY CORPORATION, as r!rs"#$ %y LY&IA CO 'AO
a"$ LILI(ET' MANL)GON, Petitioner, vs. 'ON. LOLITA GAL-
LANG, as Prs*$*"+ ,-$+ o. #/ RTC o. Ma"*0a, (ra"1/ 442
ANITA CO NG *" #r-s# .or ROC3E4ELLER NG2 a"$ #/ CO)RT O4
APPEALS, SPECIAL 13#/ &I5ISION, Respondents.
D E C I S I O N
CARPIO MORALES, J.6
Challenged via petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the
!!" Revised Rules of Court is the Septe#$er %, &''' Resolution of
the Court of (ppeals in C.(.)*.R. S+ No. 5!'!,, Siena Realty
Corporation, as represented by Lydia Co Hao and Lilibeth Manlugon v.
Hon. Lolita O. Gal-lang, as Presiding Judge o !r. "" o the R#C o
Manila, and $nita Co %g in trust or Ro&'eeller %g.
Since the petition attri$utes grave a$use of discretion on the part of
the Court of (ppeals in the issuance of su$-ect resolution, what should
have $een filed was one for certiorari under Rule ,5. On this score
alone, the petition #ust $e denied due course.
.ut even if technicalit/ were set aside, -ust the sa#e the petition fails.
+etitioners filed a petition for certiorari $efore the Court of (ppeals on
0une ", &''' or allegedl/ on the ,'th da/ fro# their receipt of the
1arch &%, &''' Order of .ranch 44 of the 1anila Regional 2rial Court
den/ing their #otion for Reconsideration of said courts Order
$*s7*ss*"+ , on #otion of private respondent, #/*r 1o7!0a*"# .
2he Court of (ppeals, $/ Resolution

of 0une &', &''', dis#issed

petitioners petition for certiorari, however, for $eing filed out of ti#e,
it holding that3
+er records, it appears that petitioners had onl/ until 1a/ &!, &'''
within which to file the +etition for Certiorari considering the following3
. +etitioners received a cop/ of the Octo$er &', !!! Order den/ing
their 4counsels5 Notice of 6ithdrawal 4and li7ewise den/ing petitioners
1otion for Reconsideration of the Order dis#issing their co#plaint5 on
Nove#$er 8, !!!9
&. +etitioners filed a #otion for reconsideration of the Octo$er &',
!!! Order on Nove#$er ", !!!9 and that
%. +etitioners received a cop/ of the 1arch &%, &''' Order den/ing
their #otion for reconsideration on (pril 8, &'''.
2he instant petition was filed on 0une ", &''' or nine :!; da/s late.
2hus, for $eing $elatedl/ filed, the instant petition is here$/
DIS1ISSED.
+etitioners thereupon filed :on 0ul/ ', &'''; a #otion for
reconsideration
&
of the a$ove)said 0une &', &''' Order of the
appellate court.
In the #eanti#e, this Court issued in (.1. No. '')&)'%)SC
:Regla(entary Period to )ile Petitions or Certiorari and Petition or
Revie* on Certiorari; a Resolution dated (ugust , &''' approving the
a#end#ent to the following provision of Section 4, Rule ,5 of the
!!" Rules of Civil +rocedure3
SEC2ION 4. 6here petition filed. T/ !#*#*o" 7ay % 80$ "o#
0a#r #/a" s*9#y :60; $ays .ro7 "o#*1 o. #/ <-$+7"#, or$r,
rso0-#*o" so-+/# #o % assa*0$ *" #/ S-!r7 Co-r# or, if it
relates to the acts or o#issions of a lower court or of a corporation,
$oard, officer or person, in the Regional 2rial Court e<ercising
-urisdiction over the territorial area as defined $/ the Supre#e Court.
It #a/ also $e filed in the Court of (ppeals whether or not the sa#e is
in aid of its -urisdiction. If it involves the acts or o#issions of a =uasi)
-udicial agenc/, and unless otherwise provided $/ law or these Rules,
the petition shall $e filed in and cogni>a$le onl/ $/ the Court of
(ppeals.
I. #/ !#*#*o"r /a$ 80$ a 7o#*o" .or "= #r*a0 or
r1o"s*$ra#*o" a.#r "o#*1 o. sa*$ <-$+7"#, or$r or
rso0-#*o", #/ !r*o$ /r*" 89$ s/a00 % *"#rr-!#$. I. #/
7o#*o" *s $"*$, #/ a++r*>$ !ar#y 7ay 80 #/ !#*#*o"
=*#/*" #/ r7a*"*"+ !r*o$, %-# =/*1/ s/a00 "o# % 0ss #/a"
8> :5; $ays *" a"y >"#, r1?o"$ .ro7 "o#*1 o. s-1/ $"*a0.
No 9#"s*o" o. #*7 s/a00 % +ra"#$ 91!# .or #/ 7os#
1o7!00*"+ raso" a"$ *" "o 1as #o 91$ 8.#" :15; $ays.
:E#phasis and underscoring supplied;
2he a#end#ent to Sec. 4, Rule ,5, which too7 effect on Septe#$er ,
&''', reads3
SEC2ION 4. 6hen and where petition filed. 2he petition shall $e filed
not later than si<t/ :,'; da/s fro# notice of the -udg#ent, order or
resolution. I" 1as a 7o#*o" .or r1o"s*$ra#*o" or "= #r*a0 *s
#*70y 80$, =/#/r s-1/ 7o#*o" *s r@-*r$ or "o#, #/ s*9#y
:60; $ay !r*o$ s/a00 % 1o-"#$ .ro7 "o#*1 o. #/ $"*a0 o.
#/ sa*$ 7o#*o".
2he petition shall $e filed in the Supre#e Court or, if it relates to the
acts or o#issions of a lower court or of a corporation, $oard, officer or
person, in the Regional 2rial Court e<ercising -urisdiction over the
territorial area as defined $/ the Supre#e Court. It #a/ also $e filed
in the Court of (ppeals whether or not the sa#e is in the aid of its
appellate -urisdiction, or in the Sandigan$a/an if it is in aid of its
appellate -urisdiction. If it involves the acts or o#issions of a =uasi)
-udicial agenc/, unless otherwise provided $/ law or these rules, the
petition shall $e filed in and cogni>a$le onl/ $/ the Court of (ppeals.
No e<tension of ti#e to file the petition shall $e granted e<cept for
co#pelling reason and in no case e<ceeding fifteen :5; da/s.
:E#phasis and underscoring supplied;
2he Court of (ppeals, acting on petitioners 1otion for Reconsideration
of its Order of 0une &', &''', denied, $/ Resolution of Septe#$er %,
&''',
%
said #otion in this wise3
< < <
?ro# the argu#ent espoused $/ petitioners counsel, it appears that
he overloo7ed the provision of second paragraph of Sec. 4, Rule ,5 of
the !!" Rules of Civil +rocedure as a#ended per Supre#e Court
Circular dated 0ul/ &, !!8, which provides as follows3
@If the petitioner had filed a #otion for new trial or reconsideration
after notice of said -udg#ent, order or resolution, the period herein
fi<ed shall $e interrupted. If the #otion is denied, the aggrieved part/
#a/ file the petition within the re#aining period, $ut which shall not
$e less than five :5; da/s in an/ event, rec7oned fro# notice of such
denial. No e<tension of ti#e shall $e granted e<cept for the #ost
co#pelling reason and in no case to e<ceed fifteen :5; da/s.@
Aeril/, the si<t/ :,'; da/ period within which to file a +etition for
Certiorari is not counted fro# the date of the receipt of the denial of
1otion for Reconsideration, $ut fro# the date of the receipt of the
=uestioned order or decision, e<cept that such ,')da/ period is
interrupted upon the filing of a 1otion for Reconsideration.
6BERE?ORE, for reason a$ove)stated, the instant #otion is DENIED.
Conse=uentl/, the present +etition for Certiorari is DIS1ISSED with
finalit/. :Cnderscoring supplied;
Bence, the petition at $ar, petitioners challenging the Septe#$er %,
&''' Resolution of the appellant court as having $een
. . . ISSCED 6I2B *R(AE (.CSE O? DISCRE2ION (S I2 6(S 1(DE
6I2BOC2 2(DIN* +RIOR 0CDICI(E NO2ICE O? SC+RE1E COCR2 (.1.
NO. '')& ) '% SC 6BICB RESOEC2ION 2OOD E??EC2 ON SE+2E1.ER
, &''', (ND 6BICB (1ENDED 2BE SECOND +(R(*R(+B O?
SEC2ION 4, RCEE ,5 O? 2BE !!" RCEES O? CIAIE +ROCEDCRE.
4
:Cnderscoring supplied;
+etitioners argu#ent is well)ta7en.
Section , Rule &! of the Rules on Evidence reads3
SEC2ION . ,-$*1*a0 "o#*1, =/" 7a"$a#ory. ( court shall ta7e
-udicial notice, =*#/o-# #/ *"#ro$-1#*o" o. >*$"1, of the
e<istence and territorial e<tent of states, their political histor/, for#s
of govern#ent and s/#$ols of nationalit/, the law of nations, the
ad#iralt/ and #ariti#e courts of the world and their seals, the
political constitution and histor/ of the +hilippines, #/ oA1*a0 a1#s
o. the legislative, e<ecutive and <-$*1*a0 $!ar#7"#s of the
+hilippines, the laws of nature, the #easure of ti#e, and the
geographical divisions. :E#phasis and underscoring supplied;
Even if petitioner did not raise or allege the a#end#ent in their
#otion for reconsideration $efore it, the Court of (ppeals should have
ta7en #andator/ -udicial notice of this Courts resolution in (.1. 1atter
No. '')'&)'% SC. 2he resolution did not have to specif/ that it had
retroactive effect as it pertains to a procedural #atter. Contrar/ to
private respondents allegation that the #atter was no longer pending
and undeter#ined, the issue of whether the petition for certiorari was
ti#el/ filed was still pending reconsideration when the a#end#ent
too7 effect on Septe#$er , &''', hence, covered $/ the its
retroactive application.
2he a#endator/ rule in their favor notwithstanding, petitioners
petition fails as stated earl/ on. 2he order of the trial court granting
private respondents 1otion to Dis#iss the co#plaint was a final, not
interlocutor/, order and as such, it was su$-ect to appeal,
5
not a
petition for certiorari. (t the ti#e petitioners filed $efore the appellate
court their petition for certiorari on the ,'th da/ following their receipt
of the Octo$er &', !!! Order of the trial court den/ing their 1otion
for Reconsideration of its dis#issal order, the said Octo$er &', !!!
Order had $eco#e final and e<ecutor/ after the 5th da/ following
petitioners receipt thereof.
B'ERE4ORE, the instant petition is, in light of the foregoing
discussions, here$/ &ENIE&.
SO OR&ERE&.
+itug, Sandoval-Gutierre,, and Corona, JJ., &on&ur.
Endnotes:
-
Rollo at ./-"0.
1
2d. at -03--04.
.
2d. at .4-.5.
"
2d. at 11.
3
Se&. -, Rule "-, -//4 Rules o Civil Pro&edure.