LEGAL NOTE 0070: CAN THE COURT OF APPEALS ADMIT NEW EVIDENCE IN A SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION FOR CERTIORARI?

 

SOURCE: SPOUSES ROGELIO MARCELO AND MILAGROS MARCELO VS. LBC BANK (G.R. NO. 183575, 11 APRIL 2011, CARPIO, J.) SUBJECT: WHETHER  C.A. CAN ADMIT NEW EVIDENCE IN A SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION FOR CERTIORARI. (BRIEF TITLE: SPOUSES MARCELO VS. LBC BANK).

 

CASE DIGEST:

 

SPOUSES MARCELO OBTAINED LOAN FROM LBC BANK AND MORTGAGED THEIR PROPERTY. THEY FAILED TO PAY THE LOAN. LBC BANK FILED EXTRA-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS. LATER LBC BANK MANAGER MILAN EXECUTED AN AFFIDAVIT OF CONSOLIDATION AND FILED IT WITH THE REGISTER OF DEEDS. MARCELO’S TITLE WAS CANCELLED AND A NEW TITLE WAS ISSUED IN THE NAME OF LBC BANK. THE LATTER FILED PETITION FOR WRIT OF POSSESSION. MARCELO SPOUSES OPPOSED ON GROUND THAT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT MILAN WAS AUTHORIZED TO EXECUTE AN AFFIDAVIT OF CONSOLIDATION. RTC ISSUED WRIT OF POSSESSION. MARCELO SPOUSED FILED WITH C.A. A SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION FOR CERTIOARI.  C.A. REVERSED RTC DECISION. LBC MOVED FOR RECONSIDERATION ATTACHING THERETO A SECRETARY’S CERTIFICATE SHOWING THAT MILAN HAS AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AN AFFIDAVIT OF CONSOLIDATION. C.A. RECONSIDERED ITS DECISION AND AFFIRMED RTC DECISION.

 

ISSUE: CAN ADMIT NEW EVIDENCE IN A CIVIL ACTION FOR CERIORARI?

 

YES.

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 9 OF BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 129, AS AMENDED, THE COURT OF APPEALS SHALL HAVE THE POWER TO RECEIVE EVIDENCE AND PERFORM ANY AND ALL ACTS NECESSARY TO RESOLVE FACTUAL ISSUES RAISED IN CASES FALLING WITHIN ITS ORIGINAL AND APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

 

In Maralit v. Philippine National Bank,14 where petitioner Maralit questioned the appellate court’s admission and appreciation of a belatedly submitted documentary evidence, the Court held that “[i]n a special civil action for certiorari, the Court of Appeals has ample authority to receive new evidence and perform any act necessary to resolve factual issues.” The Court explained further:

Section 9 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended, states that, “The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or further proceedings.”15

Likewise, in VMC Rural Electric Service Cooperative, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,16 the Court held:

[I]t is already settled that under Section 9 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act No. 7902 (An Act Expanding the Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals, amending for the purpose of Section Nine of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 as amended, known as the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980), the Court of Appeals — pursuant to the exercise of its original jurisdiction over Petitions for Certiorari — is specifically given the power to pass upon the evidence, if and when necessary, to resolve factual issues. As clearly stated in Section 9 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act 7902:

The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in cases falling within its original and appellate jurisdiction, including the power to grant and conduct new trials or further proceedings. x x x.

Clearly, the Court of Appeals did not err in admitting the evidence showing LBC Bank’s express ratification ofMilan’s consolidation of the title over the subject property. Further, the Court of Appeals did not err in admitting such evidence in resolving LBC Bank’s motion for reconsideration in a special civil action for certiorari. To rule otherwise will certainly defeat the ends of substantial justice.

1 Under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court.

2 Rollo, pp. 32-42. Penned by Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam, with Associate Justices Mario L. Guariña, III and Mariflor Punzalan-Castillo, concurring.

3 Id. at 44-46.

4 Docketed as P-525-2004.

5 Records, p. 55. Penned by Judge Basilio R. Gabo, Jr.

6Id. at 56.

7 Id. at 154-164.

8 Id. at 163-164.

9Id. at 165-175.

10Id. at 195.

11Id. at 196. Executed by Jennifer D. Fajelagutan, Assistant Corporate Secretary of LBC Bank.

12Id. at 197-198. Executed by Jennifer D. Fajelagutan, Assistant Corporate Secretary of LBC Bank.

13 Id. at 41-42.

14 G.R. No. 163788, 24 August 2009, 596 SCRA 662.

15Id. at 682.

16 G.R. No. 153144, 12 October 2006, 504 SCRA 336, 348-350, cited in Maralit v. Philippine National Bank, supra.