’
GR NO- 105909 ,June 28, 1994
MUNIGPALITY OF. PILILLIA, RIZAL, Petihemer
ve. ON. CouRT OF APPEALS, HON. ARTURO A- MARAVE,
as Presiding Judge, Regionol Trial Crut, Branch 72,
Mormg, Rieal and PHILIPPINE PETROLEUM Cox PORATION,
Res poacteds
FACTS: :
Regimmak Tra Court CRTC) of Taney, Rizal , Br -
amth 0, rendered jrdguent in civil case In faumr of
plosnbft, now herein peirtimer Municipality pf Piliilion,
Riral , agarnst dant, ners herein privale respondent
F Philippine Petr lewm Cov poration (PPC) , ovclering therein
Actondomt to poy savd plarnnff ammunt representing
O)daves on business ; 6) store permit fer; @)imeyers porntt
fee; @ samutamg Inspection j and ® the costs of sutt.
The Court crffirmed the RIC Judgment with wodlific-
ations om the amount.
In umneetion with the exeeuhon of stad. Jodginent,
. Felix Mendicla, filed a motion in behal
plaintiff muieipaléty with thy, RTC for the examinchion
of defendomd cerporations gross sales fy the porpose of
Pe the tm om business imposed under te Local
lay Code- :
Defondand corporation fled a motor manifestation
to the effet sat Pllc ne Nicomedes ne
(patemia) received poy ment fam it as full Soh sfaction
of the abover mentiond jrdgment ,as evidenced byi sedation of ad a
Fant gain had already beom sotisfied.
Seles ry Athy Mendiola pose
reum sideration 4 the a ey oder,
re tyes duc under
|) eRe law firm of Atty - egal ae
tla Pe two Us fv a
Bie
sovies atrreys
motion: _
Atty Merdiola » aga4n, tn bebalf of —hereln petifiowy
municipality « filed a pebtin fry. a with the
- Supoeme. Cewct Crwct , which petition was rs fucred ie the CAS
oe PPC tiled a mation + hend-
eho — hawing beeen He ig
i — o private counsel In Cay
we ae,
the maar cipality Hhrmgh the proper provincial ov
mud erpal Lugal offi Whim fed a
ream sl devation whitch ae CA
aaa 4 eee‘Issues: —
ae cher eee ele ured ny ee Peete
bint regarding Atty: ty. mendiola's author thority, leroug ht —
up for the first Hint on appeal ;
> Vrether or not the Gis tn en to Pewee: a
__pentien with alducnadive remedy of —fishg sihadlar—
petition} _
2 Whether_or ie ca. dic in eral. Hrot He
| ili af the Inston penton hy the private Crys
Phe is the Molatim of Jams “ow de tiptoe see
HELD: x
_____ Petitim ts olevoid “of mer as thE
The CA ts covrveet in foe ‘that Atty. Mediate
. ___ line. authority te vi tn_bebalf of and in te
name of “the. Municipality of Pita. Private attorneys
_camnot “represen a proving oy mune ality ih lawsuits
| CRownos VS Gr dal) { Provine of Cebu ye lnbermedbade
Appellate Court, stat)
Li Seation 18> of the Reviced Jdminitradive Coda :
___“Seetion 83. eal to repreceut provinces amd
vindal subolivicions iv litigation « = The provinetal
__ fiscal, shal crate pve Se
es Pe aoe nae in Cages where
Hee tulpalitd er munitipal clistriet in question=— a pl te pin Hea shal ast m behalf of —
To to Somethin “or mumielpal. districh
in the Same _provine. when interests of a peoulneil
griecnanent amd of amas petinical Mvision tewecl ave
the proving
ae fiscal “tc dicquolified $9 seme.
oe | abity ov softer polifient stu siubdivistor of
a previne, sprelel 2 air vous be tupleyed by,
ts tauncil-
ec Under the albove provisixt only He provinetal
—fiseal, andl the muni vieal affoaey com veprescuct
—;pavine on m_municypabity in 1 thet Oe This povi-
Sim_is mam doctor . The muuscipe Utys outa ty to
[oy aw privale Jemryor iS es pressly Oneited a oe
sifwdittons whore ihe grovinetal fiscal is dicgualified.
“pe rtpresent ft Fo the ey to hes
Me provincial peal wk dngulted +t
‘handle He cose must wu on rteord. Fp the
instamt case, there 1s voting in the vteorde to
show that He provinotal seal is disqualified Yo
ast ot Counsel, ‘pence, ‘fhe appearance of herein
privade tountel fs withont authority of laws.
"The Submission of Aly: Mendiola, Hnat te
ecerption includes gituatime wherein the provincial
pou refuses to handle the case om be
‘euctuned. Unlike a practietna later who has tea whe. PPC. A clewt , by appearing peysrrolt avd
__pawidparye
refuse ol perform. ce functions on grounds not
oe for by lam) otitis yislost lis oath
of office “Inskad of engaging the Servius of &
“speetal atforney, whe ae traneil showed.
usst the Seeretayy of _fushe. te _opporiet an
ask provineral 720aL in place of Yea frovinscal,
who has dobined | do handle an prosecute
F ay case in court, pursuant to Seetion @74 af.
foe Revised Aduuivnistroctive Code. é:
Moreover, fre legality of _attty- mordolas repre-
statin cam be queshmed at aunty stage of te
pruding s. Brow Ea aniiea that pty. Mendiola was
dluby althovised saad authority is ceumed to have
| ben revoke wun the murattlpality _ withort lis
‘ov 1 entered Ito a bomnprrnnise ieee
presemting O _ pion _-foy_ is °% emsr pe
hawt _inplied’ distal ssed Wks lamngur Bef ot Com-
mort law) under bert 26, Rule 120 of the
Rules of Court, 0 om way alismies has lawpor at
amy tine of at ama) Sage of te proasdings, ara
tore ts wothing, to rental Lifigauc fron
befrre ‘ee es Ie ow. ee
Petition at bor & denied for [nek of merit
ond the jet gmcendt of vespon aon Court
Teco eh. ee be fess ei