GR L 1276; (April, 1948) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-1276; April 30, 1948
ROSARIO VALERA, assisted by her husband, Juan Valera, petitioner, vs. MARIANO TUASON, Jr., Justice of the Peace of Lagayan, Abra, MANUEL TULLAS ET AL., respondents-appellees. THE PROVINCIAL FISCAL, intervenor-appellee.
FACTS
A complaint for forcible entry was filed in the justice of the peace court of Lagayan, presided by Judge Federico Paredes. Judge Paredes disqualified himself due to relationship to a party and transferred the case to the justice of the peace of La Paz, the nearest municipality, following a circular of the Secretary of Justice. The La Paz justice of the peace proceeded with the trial over the defendants’ objection, rendered judgment for the plaintiff, and returned the case with his decision to the Lagayan court. Meanwhile, a new justice of the peace, Mariano B. Tuason, had been appointed for Lagayan. Upon receiving the case, the defendants moved for a new trial, challenging the La Paz justice’s jurisdiction. Justice Tuason declared the La Paz judgment null and void, ordered a new hearing before him, and held that the transfer by the disqualifying justice was invalid under Section 211 of the Revised Administrative Code, which he believed required the district judge to designate the nearest justice of the peace. The Court of First Instance of Abra dismissed a petition for certiorari challenging this annulment, but on a different ground, opining that Section 73 of the Code of Civil Procedure had been abrogated by the new Rules of Court.
ISSUE
Whether Section 73 of the Code of Civil Procedure (on transfer of cases by a disqualified justice of the peace to the nearest justice of the peace) or Section 211 of the Revised Administrative Code (on designation by the district judge in case of disqualification) governs the procedure when a justice of the peace is disqualified, and whether Section 73 was repealed by the Rules of Court.
RULING
The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of First Instance. It held that Section 73 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 211 of the Revised Administrative Code can and should be harmonized. Section 73 applies to disqualifications under Section 8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, while Section 211 applies to other disqualifications or disabilities not covered by the Code. The Court applied the rule that a special law (Section 73) prevails over a general law (Section 211). Furthermore, the legislative history indicates both provisions were intended to operate side by side. The Rules of Court did not repeal Section 73, as the authority of a judge to try a case is a matter of substantive law, not merely procedural rules covered by the Rules of Court. Therefore, the transfer by the disqualified justice of the peace to the nearest justice of the peace was valid, and the La Paz justice’s decision should stand.
AI Generated by Armztrong.