Posted by: Michelle M. Bacarra on July 26, 2018
FACTS:
Joaquin Ga filed a complaint for Recovery of Property and Ownership of a parcel of land. The complaint is directed to Noberyo Ga and file before the Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP).
COSLAP rendered a decision favoring Joaquin Ga and heirs the rightful owner of the contested lot.
With the deniall of the motion for reconsideration, the respondents sought a Petition for Certiorari Preliminary Injunction, Quieting of Title and Damages with Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order with the RTC.
The RTC dismissed the case enunciating that it has no jurisdiction to negate a decision correlative body. This decision was assailed in a petition before the Court of Appeals which was consequently granted for reasons: 1) the petition was erroneously filed with the trial court, it must be filed with the Court of Appeals; COSLAP's jurisdiction is over land disputes clothed with "public land" classification.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in its decision to set aside COSLAP's ruling.
HELD:
Under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals and Quasi-Judicial agencies are appealable with the Court of Appeals, except for orders issued under the Labor Code.
Here, the petition was not appropriately filed to appeal the decision of COSLAP.
Executive Order No. 561 which created COSLAP specifically made mention of the jurisdiction of the agency. To resolve land disputes of public domain between occupants/squatters and public land claimants/applicants.
It has been ruled that a judgment rendered by a body or tribunal that has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case is no judgment at all. Thus, the decision of COSLAP is ineffectual, having no jurisdiction, as the subject lot was not considered as part of the public domain and had always been a private land.
FACTS:
Joaquin Ga filed a complaint for Recovery of Property and Ownership of a parcel of land. The complaint is directed to Noberyo Ga and file before the Commission on the Settlement of Land Problems (COSLAP).
COSLAP rendered a decision favoring Joaquin Ga and heirs the rightful owner of the contested lot.
With the deniall of the motion for reconsideration, the respondents sought a Petition for Certiorari Preliminary Injunction, Quieting of Title and Damages with Prayer for Temporary Restraining Order with the RTC.
The RTC dismissed the case enunciating that it has no jurisdiction to negate a decision correlative body. This decision was assailed in a petition before the Court of Appeals which was consequently granted for reasons: 1) the petition was erroneously filed with the trial court, it must be filed with the Court of Appeals; COSLAP's jurisdiction is over land disputes clothed with "public land" classification.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in its decision to set aside COSLAP's ruling.
HELD:
Under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court, appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals and Quasi-Judicial agencies are appealable with the Court of Appeals, except for orders issued under the Labor Code.
Here, the petition was not appropriately filed to appeal the decision of COSLAP.
Executive Order No. 561 which created COSLAP specifically made mention of the jurisdiction of the agency. To resolve land disputes of public domain between occupants/squatters and public land claimants/applicants.
It has been ruled that a judgment rendered by a body or tribunal that has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the case is no judgment at all. Thus, the decision of COSLAP is ineffectual, having no jurisdiction, as the subject lot was not considered as part of the public domain and had always been a private land.
