GR L 25772; (November, 1967) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-25772 November 29, 1967
PERFECTO BALASON, protestant-appellee, vs. ERNESTO BALIDO, protestee-appellant.
FACTS
The case involves an election protest over the position of Barrio Captain of Concepcion, Batangas, Batangas, following the barrio elections held on January 12, 1964, pursuant to Republic Act 3590 (the Barrio Charter). The Board of Election Tellers proclaimed Ernesto Balido as the duly elected Barrio Captain with 151 votes, against Perfecto Balason who obtained 149 votes, a plurality of two votes. On January 25, 1964, Perfecto Balason filed an election protest before the Municipal Court of Batangas, Batangas, on grounds of errors or mistakes in the appreciation of ballots and improper adjudication of votes. The Municipal Judge rendered a decision declaring Perfecto Balason the winner with a plurality of six votes, ordering Ernesto Balido to pay damages and costs. Ernesto Balido appealed to the Court of First Instance of Batangas, which, after trial, also declared Perfecto Balason the winner with a plurality of three votes and ordered Ernesto Balido to pay attorney’s fees and costs. Ernesto Balido appealed to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to review the factual findings of the Court of First Instance regarding the appreciation of disputed ballots in a barrio election protest, as governed by Section 8 of Republic Act 3590 (the Barrio Charter).
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. It held that, pursuant to Section 8 of Republic Act 3590, the decision of the Court of First Instance on questions of fact in barrio election disputes is final. The appellant’s assignments of error pertained to the factual correctness of the trial court’s appreciation of specific ballots (e.g., whether ballots were marked, valid, or official). Since these are factual issues, the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review them. Furthermore, the Court found that the trial court’s appreciation of the disputed ballots was in accordance with the facts and the law. The appeal was dismissed, and costs were imposed on the appellant.