GR L 15186; (August, 1960) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-15186; August 31, 1960
GONZALO G. DE GUZMAN, plaintiff-appellant, vs. ALFREDO TRINIDAD and FELIX BUENAVENTURA, defendants-appellees.
FACTS
1. Plaintiff-appellant Gonzalo G. de Guzman filed a complaint on September 10, 1954, in the Justice of the Peace Court of Gapan, Nueva Ecija, against defendants-appellees Alfredo Trinidad and Felix Buenaventura to recover unpaid rentals, damages, and irrigation fees under a lease contract for riceland dated January 10, 1953.
2. On October 23, 1954, the Justice of the Peace Court rendered judgment in favor of de Guzman. Defendant Trinidad appealed to the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija; defendant Buenaventura did not appeal, having paid his share.
3. In the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, a motion to dismiss was filed, alleging the Justice of the Peace Court lacked jurisdiction as it was a tenancy case. The court dismissed the case on December 13, 1954, without prejudice. A writ of execution was issued by the Justice of the Peace Court on November 6, 1954, returning the land to de Guzman.
4. De Guzman filed another action in the Court of Industrial Relations on December 23, 1954, which was dismissed on May 12, 1955, for lack of jurisdiction due to the absence of a tenancy relationship.
5. On December 5, 1955, de Guzman filed another action in the Justice of the Peace Court of Gapan (Civil Case No. 115). The court dismissed it for lack of venue, as the contract was executed in Manila.
6. On April 11, 1956, de Guzman filed a complaint in the Justice of the Peace (Municipal) Court of Manila. The court initially granted a motion to dismiss as to Buenaventura but later included him as a defendant after trial, rendering judgment against both defendants.
7. Both defendants appealed to the Court of First Instance of Manila (Civil Case No. 23409), where they filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of res judicata (barred by prior judgment). The court, presided by Judge Magno S. Gatmaitan, granted the motion to dismiss on March 1, 1958. De Guzman appealed this order.
ISSUE
Whether the action filed in the Municipal Court of Manila is barred by a prior judgment, specifically the order of dismissal issued by the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija on December 13, 1954.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the Court of First Instance of Manila dismissing the complaint. The action filed in the Municipal Court of Manila is the same as the first action filed in the Justice of the Peace Court of Gapan, involving the same parties and cause of action (enforcement of obligations under the lease contract). The Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija had dismissed the appealed case, and this order became final as de Guzman failed to appeal from it. The Supreme Court held that the dismissal by the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija, even if without prejudice, did not entitle de Guzman to bring another action in a different court after failing to avail of the remedy of appeal. The loss of his claim was attributable to his own mistake in not properly appealing the initial dismissal and in subsequently filing actions in courts without jurisdiction. The appeal was dismissed, and costs were imposed on appellant de Guzman.