8/9/2019 Conde vs. Intermediate Appellate Court - Digest

1/2

Conde vs. Intermediate Appellate Court

FACTS: Petitioners fled an action to annul the judgment o the Courto Appeals which reversed the decision o the Regional Trial Court andordered the petitioners and/or their successors-in-interest to deliver

immediately the ownership and possession o the property in questionto the then plainti-appellant !arcelo "utierre#$ %n their complaint fled&eore the Regional Trial Court o Capas' Tarlac' the petitioners allegedthat through raud' "utierre# was a&le to ma(e it appear that he wasthe son o )ste&an "utierre# and *ermina Ramos and as a necessaryconsequence o such fliation' was the a&solute owner &y succession o the property in question$

 The trial court dismissed the petitioners+ complaint on the ground thatit had no jurisdiction to annul the judgment o the Court o Appeals$,pon the denial o their motion or reconsideration' the petitioners fled

a petition or certiorari' mandamus and a writ o injunction &eore theappellate court$ The said court in turn' dismissed the petition and asu&sequent motion or reconsideration on the grounds that a Regional Trial Court is without jurisdiction to annul the judgment o the Court o Appeals and that only the upreme Court is empowered to review the judgment o said appellate court$ .ence' the petitioners elevated thecase &eore the C$

 The C issued a resolution remanding the case to the appellate courtor decision on the merits$

 The appellate court rendered a decision dismissing the petition or lac(o jurisdiction and or lac( o merit$ %n its decision' on the issue o  jurisdiction' the respondent court ruled that since the decision o the!etropolitan Trial Court can &e annulled &y the Regional Trial Court anda decision o the latter is annulla&le &y the Court o Appeals' thenlogically' the decision o the appellate court should &e annulla&le only&y the upreme Court$

ISSUE: 01 remand o case to the appellate court or decision on themerits limited the appellate court+s decision only to the merits o thecase$

HELD:  e need not emphasi#e the rule that this Court decidesappeals which only involve questions o law and that 2it is not theunction o the upreme Court to analy#e or weigh such evidence allover again' its jurisdiction &eing limited to receiving errors o law thatmight have &een committed &y the lower court$3 %t was' thus' totallypointless or the %ntermediate Appellate Court to delve into thequestion o whether or not it has jurisdiction to pass upon the merits o 

8/9/2019 Conde vs. Intermediate Appellate Court - Digest

2/2

the petition which then alleged the perpetration o raud &y one o theparties in the original case' and which there&y called or a review o the actual fndings o the court$ *urthermore' the act that this Courtalready remanded the case to the appellate court or decision on themerits should have prompted the latter to limit its decision only to the

merits o the case$