G.R. No.

171219               September 3, 2012

ATTY. FE Q. PALMIANO-SALVADOR, Petitioner, vs.
CONSTANTINO ANGELES, substituted by LUZ G. ANGELES*, Respondent.

Facts

Respondent-appellee Constantino Angeles is one of the registered owners of a parcel of land

located in Sampaloc, Manila. Said land was leased to Jelly Galiga as a lessee with a lease
contract. Subsequently, herein petitioner Fe Salvador allegedly bought the land from Galiga who
represented herself as the owner, being the one in possession. Salvador remained in
possession of said property from Nov. 1993-present.

On Nov. 18, 1993 respondent-appelle Angeles sent a letter to petitioner-appellant Salvador

demanding the latter to vacate the property, which Salvador ignored. Angeles, through Rosauro
Diaz, filed a complaint for ejectment with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, Branch 16
against Salvaodr.

MeTC ruled in favor of Angeles.

Salvador filed an appeal in RTC, citing that Diaz had no authority to file the suit at the time of its
filing.1 RTC denied appeal.

Petitioner elevated case to CA. CA dismissed said petition for lack of merit.

Issue

WON Diaz’s failure to present proof of his authority to represent respondent rendered the
complaint and the proceedings null and void.

Ruling

In Tamondong v. Court of Appeals, the Court categorically stated that "[i]f a complaint is filed for
and in behalf of the plaintiff [by one] who is not authorized to do so, the complaint is not deemed
filed. An unauthorized complaint does not produce any legal effect. Hence, the court should
dismiss the complaint on the ground that it has no jurisdiction over the complaint and the
plaintiff."

Moreover, in Cosco Philippines Shipping, Inc. v. Kemper Insurance Company, the Court said,
"[i]n order for the court to have authority to dispose of the case on the merits, it must acquire
jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties. Courts acquire jurisdiction over the plaintiffs
upon the filing of the complaint, and to be bound by a decision, a party should first be subjected
to the court's jurisdiction. Clearly, since no valid complaint was ever filed with the [MeTC], the
same did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of respondent [plaintiff before the lower court]."

Thus the MeTC never acquired jurisdiction over the case and all proceedings before it were null
and void.

Petition is GRANTED.

1
Additional note: Diaz represented himself as Angeles’ attorney-in-fact when the complaint was filed before
the MeTC. However, there was no copy of any document that would validate the supposed authority granted
to him. A year after the complaint was filed, Diaz presented a Special Power of Attorney, but the SPA was
executed on Nov. 16, 1994, more than a month after the complaint was filed in 1993.