Yacapin v. Court of First Instance
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: A parcel of land with an area of 12,075 square meters was the subject of litigation. The original judgment adjudicated the northern portion (2,437.88 sq. m.) to Marciano Yacapin as owner and possessor, and the remainder (9,537.12 sq. m.) was to be divided among the five children of the original owner, Buenaventurada Salon. Procedural History: The sheriff could not implement the writ of execution because the land's actual area was found to be only 5,618 sq. m. A commissioner appointed by the court reported that the northern portion adjudicated to Yacapin had been eroded by the sea, and only a portion of 5,618 sq. m. remained, included within the southern portion adjudicated to the heirs of Salon. Yacapin filed a motion praying his share be taken from the existing area, which was objected to by the plaintiffs. The Petition: The lower court issued an order dated February 6, 1973, finding that the northern portion was eroded by the sea, leaving only 5,618 sq. m., and ordered that this remainder be delivered to the owners. This order was assailed by Yacapin via a petition for review on certiorari, filed beyond the reglementary period.
Issue(s)
Whether the petition for review on certiorari was filed within the reglementary period. Whether the lower court gravely abused its discretion in ordering the execution of the judgment by delivering the remaining 5,618 square meters of land to the owners thereof, despite the erosion of a portion of the land.
Ruling
The petition for review on certiorari is dismissed. The Court held that the lower court did not gravely abuse its discretion in issuing the questioned order.
Ratio Decidendi
On the timeliness of the petition: The petition for review on certiorari was filed beyond the reglementary thirty-day period prescribed by Republic Act No. 5440. The petitioner's counsel received the order of execution on February 9, 1973. A motion for reconsideration was filed 27 days later, which was denied on December 19, 1973. A copy of the denial was served on January 3, 1974, leaving only three days to file the petition. The instant petition was filed on February 6, 1974, which is clearly belated. On the alleged grave abuse of discretion: The Court held that the lower court did not gravely abuse its discretion in ordering the delivery of the remaining 5,618 square meters of land to the owners. The petitioner, Marciano Yacapin, could not claim any share in the remaining area because that portion, which was part of the southern portion adjoining his adjudicated northern portion, clearly belonged to the heirs of Buenaventurada Salon. Yacapin's share, which had been segregated and of which he was the administrator and possessor, was submerged by the sea. The sea, through erosion, dispossessed Yacapin of his portion, and the principle of res periit domino suo (the thing perishes to the owner) applies, meaning Yacapin alone should bear the loss. The lower court's order did not deprive him of his share, alter its decision, or annul his title; it merely recognized the physical reality of the land's diminished area due to natural causes. The court's action was a proper exercise of its inherent power to control its process and orders to conform to law and justice.
Main Doctrine
The Court held that the lower court did not gravely abuse its discretion in ordering the delivery of the remaining land to its owners, as the petitioner's share was lost due to sea erosion, a form of force majeure, and the principle of res periit domino suo applies.