G.R. No. L-3883; July 29, 1950
SIMEONA M. VDA. DE MUYOT, petitioner, vs. HON. GUILLERMO CABRERA, in his capacity as Judge, Municipal Court of Manila, Branch II, and LO HIANG, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Simeona M. Vda. de Muyot filed a complaint for desahucio (ejectment) against respondent Lo Hiang in the Municipal Court of Manila. She alleged she subleased a parcel of land to Lo Hiang, who failed to pay monthly rentals from June 17, 1949, to January 16, 1950, aggregating P30,100. Lo Hiang, in his answer, alleged the sublessor violated certain contract stipulations, causing him damage. He also prayed for dismissal and that the case be remitted to the Court of First Instance (CFI), where he had a pending action (Civil Case No. 10210) against Muyot seeking rescission of the sublease contract and indemnity. The Municipal Court Judge, Guillermo Cabrera, issued a resolution declining jurisdiction and ordering the records transmitted to the CFI, reasoning that the court lacked jurisdiction to determine who violated the contract and that a related case was already pending in the CFI.

ISSUE

Whether the Municipal Court has jurisdiction to try and decide the desahucio (ejectment) case.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that the respondent Judge of the Municipal Court has exclusive original jurisdiction under Rule 72 (now the Rules of Court on ejectment) to try and decide the desahucio case. By refusing to decide it and endorsing it to the CFI, the judge neglected a duty specifically enjoined by law. The remedy of mandamus is proper to compel the performance of that duty. The writ was issued, with costs against Lo Hiang.

AI Generated by Armztrong.