BENJAMIN AND ROSENDA ESPINO, Petitioners

Versus
CARMITA LEGARDA, Respondent, March 17, 2006
Facts:
RTC receives three separate complaints for accion publiciana.
Respondent prayed petitioners through ordered to vacate the lots and
pay reasonable compensation for the use and occupancy of the
premises.
Lower court rendered Decision against petitioners to vacate the
lots and deliver possession to respondent.
Defendants- appellants vigorously assert that the case did not
undergo conciliation proceedings in violation of the provisions of
Presidential Decree No. 1508 or the Katarungang Pambarangay Law.
A petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied by
the CA. Petition for Review on Certiorari.
Issue:
Whether respondent complied with the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law providing for a conciliation before any complaint,
petition, action, or proceeding involving any matter within the
authority of the Lupon of the barangay shall be filled or instituted in
the court.
Held:
Failure to exercise jurisdiction should be made before the court of
the complaint and raised answer such other pleading allowed under
the Rules of Court.
Yes, Respondent refers the dispute to the barangay for amicable
settlement before filing her complaint, with the court.
The court denies the petition; challenged decision and resolution of
the CA are affirmed. Costs against petitioners