G.R. No. 170914, April 13, 2011
STEFAN TITO MIÑOZA, Petitioner, vs. HON. CESAR TOMAS LOPEZ, in his official capacity as Mayor and Chair, Loon Cockpit Arena Bidding and Awards Committee, its Members namely: HERMINIGILDO M. CALIFORNIA, NOEL CASTROJO, JESSE SEVILLA, FORTUNATO GARAY, PERFECTO MANTE, ROGELIO GANADOS, P/INSP. JASEN MAGARAN, SANGGUNIANG BAYAN OF LOON, BOHOL, represented by its Presiding Officer, Vice Mayor RAUL BARBARONA, and MARCELO EPE, Respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Stefan Tito Miñoza was the licensed owner and operator of the Loon Cockpit Arena in Cogon Norte, Loon, Bohol since 1988. Due to the dilapidation of the building and a notice to vacate, he transferred his business and began constructing a new cockpit in Bgy. Lintuan in March 2001, after securing the necessary permits from municipal officials. On January 11, 2002, respondent Mayor Cesar Tomas Lopez issued him a temporary permit to operate at the new location. However, on January 17, 2002, the Sangguniang Bayan issued Resolution No. 02-016 declaring the Bgy. Lintuan cockpit as unlicensed and unfit, leading Mayor Lopez to revoke the temporary permit. Subsequently, the municipality enacted the “Cockfighting Ordinance of Loon” and, pursuant to it, the Sangguniang Bayan passed Resolution No. 03-161 opening a 25-year franchise for public bidding. The bidding was held on August 25, 2003. Petitioner did not personally submit a bid, knowing Mayor Lopez would thwart his efforts due to a pending Ombudsman case. Instead, his uncle, Jose Uy, submitted a bid on his behalf. The bidding was won by respondent Marcelo Epe, and a franchise was granted to him via Municipal Ordinance No. 03-007. On January 29, 2004, petitioner filed a Complaint with the RTC of Bohol for Annulment of the bidding process and the ordinance, and for Damages, alleging the bidding was rigged in favor of Marcelo Epe, Mayor Lopez’s rumored business partner. He also claimed moral, exemplary, and actual damages for the revocation of his permits after he had spent approximately one million pesos on construction. Marcelo Epe filed an Answer-in-Intervention and a Motion to Dismiss, arguing petitioner lacked cause of action and was estopped since he was not a bidder and filed no protest. The RTC dismissed the complaint on March 9, 2004, ruling petitioner was not the proper party to sue as he was not a bidding participant and was undeserving of damages. The RTC’s dismissal was affirmed by the Court of Appeals in its July 29, 2005 Decision, prompting this Petition for Review.

ISSUE

Whether petitioner Stefan Tito Miñoza is the real party in interest with the legal personality to sue for the annulment of the public bidding of the cockpit franchise and the resulting municipal ordinance, and for damages.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the lower courts, holding that petitioner is not the real party in interest. The Court ruled that an action must be prosecuted and defended in the name of the real party in interest, i.e., the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit. In this case, petitioner did not personally participate in the public bidding for the cockpit franchise. It was his uncle, Jose Uy, who submitted a bid. Therefore, petitioner had no direct and material interest in the subject matter of the bidding. His status as a former licensed cockpit operator and as the owner of a newly constructed cockpit did not confer upon him the requisite legal standing to challenge the bidding or the ordinance that granted the franchise to the winning bidder. The Court also found no merit in the claim for damages, as the permit granted to him was merely temporary and did not confer a vested right. The revocation, based on a Sangguniang Bayan resolution declaring his cockpit substandard and unsafe, was within the municipality’s regulatory powers. Consequently, the Petition was DENIED, and the assailed Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution were AFFIRMED.