G.R. No. 153821 ; February 13, 2008
Forbes Park Association, Inc., petitioner, vs. Pagrel, Inc., Pilar R. De Lagdameo, Enrique B. Lagdameo, Atty. Mila B. Flores in her capacity as the Register of Deeds of Makati City, and the Hon. Cesar D. Santamaria in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the RTC of Makati, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Forbes Park Association, Inc. (FPA) is the homeowners’ association for the exclusive Forbes Park subdivision. The Deed of Restrictions, annotated on members’ titles, required a two-thirds vote for its extension. After contentious meetings in 1996, a June 30, 1997 election resulted in a vote to extend the restrictions. The HIGC Appeals Board later validated this extension, a decision affirmed by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 59359, which became final on September 22, 2004. Meanwhile, private respondents Pagrel, Inc. and the Lagdameos filed a separate petition with the RTC to cancel the deed annotations on their titles, which the RTC granted. FPA then filed a petition for annulment of this RTC order with the CA, docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 67263.
The CA dismissed CA-G.R. SP No. 67263 on the ground of litis pendentia, citing the pending petition for review before the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 148733, which also involved FPA and the Register of Deeds. FPA moved for reconsideration, arguing the two cases were not identical. The CA denied the motion. FPA thus elevated the matter to the Supreme Court, contending the CA erred in applying litis pendentia.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals correctly dismissed CA-G.R. SP No. 67263 on the ground of litis pendentia.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court reversed the CA, holding that litis pendentia was improperly invoked. For litis pendentia to bar a subsequent action, there must be identity of parties, rights asserted, and reliefs prayed for in the two cases. Here, while G.R. No. 148733 involved FPA and the Register of Deeds concerning the annotation of the extended restrictions, CA-G.R. SP No. 67263 was a petition for annulment of an RTC order that had already canceled the annotations on the specific titles of private respondents Pagrel, Inc. and the Lagdameos. The parties and the reliefs sought were not identical. Crucially, G.R. No. 148733 had already been dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 25, 2005, and terminated prior to this decision. Therefore, no pending case existed to serve as a prejudicial block. The obstacle of litis pendentia was removed, and the petition in CA-G.R. SP No. 67263 should proceed. The case was remanded to the CA for immediate resolution.