G.R. No. L-70987 May 5, 1988
GREGORIO Y. LIMPIN, JR. and ROGELIO M. SARMIENTO, petitioners, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and GUILLERMO PONCE, respondents.

FACTS

This case involves multiple motions arising from the execution of a final Supreme Court decision. The Court had previously dismissed the petitioners’ appeal and affirmed the Intermediate Appellate Court’s judgment, which ordered the confirmation of a foreclosure sale of certain lots in favor of respondent Guillermo Ponce and the issuance of a writ of possession. This judgment became final and executory. Subsequently, petitioners filed a new civil case (Q-51117) before Judge Teodoro Beltran of the RTC, Branch 78, which issued a restraining order and later a preliminary injunction against the implementation of the writ of possession issued by another RTC branch (Branch 86) in the original foreclosure case. This prompted Ponce to file a motion for contempt against Judge Beltran and petitioner Sarmiento for allegedly hindering the enforcement of a final Supreme Court judgment.
In response, petitioners’ counsel, Atty. Danilo Basa, filed several counter-motions. These included petitions to declare Ponce and his attorneys in contempt for allegedly concealing a donation of the mortgage credit to a foundation and using it for tax deductions, thereby committing a fraud on the courts. Atty. Basa also filed motions for the inhibition of Supreme Court Justices allegedly associated with the law firm representing Ponce, and multiple motions seeking the substantive reconsideration or modification of the Court’s already final and executory January 30, 1987 decision.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the various motions filed by the petitioners and their counsel, particularly those seeking to relitigate a final judgment and those accusing parties and judges of contempt and fraud, have merit and should be granted.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied all motions filed by petitioners and Atty. Basa and granted Ponce’s motion for an alias writ of possession. The Court’s final decision of January 30, 1987 had conclusively settled the rights of the parties, establishing Ponce’s superior lien and right to foreclose. The principle of finality of judgment bars the re-litigation of issues already decided. The petitioners’ new case before Judge Beltran (Q-51117) constituted forum-shopping, as it sought to obtain the same relief—prevention of the foreclosure—that had been definitively denied by the Supreme Court. Judge Beltran’s issuance of an injunction against the execution of a final judgment of a co-equal court was a grave abuse of discretion.
Regarding the alleged fraud concerning the donation, the Court ruled this issue was irrelevant and unavailing. It had already been addressed in the final decision, noting the donation was unregistered and did not affect Ponce’s rights as mortgage creditor. Raising it anew was a dilatory tactic. The motions for inhibition were baseless, as mere association with a law firm does not constitute ground for disqualification. The multiple motions for reconsideration of a final judgment were improper and frivolous. The Court ordered the dismissal of the new cases filed by petitioners, nullified the injunctive orders issued by Judge Beltran, and directed the immediate execution of the final judgment via an alias writ of possession.