6. Borje vs. CFI of Misamis Occidental Br.

II

Facts: xxx Summary or outright dismissals of actions are not proper where there are
1. Borje is the counsel of the water consuming public of Ozamis City, he factual matters in dispute which need presentation and appreciation of evidence.
allegedly received a blank water bill, with no indication of the meter … Short cuts in judicial processes are to be avoided when they impede rather than
readings, no. of cubic meters consumed and the amount to be paid, hence promote a judicious dispensation of justice xxx
he refused to pay said bill which lead to the disconnection of his services;
2. He brought an action for damages w/ preliminary injunction against MOWD
in the respondent Court;
3. The Court then issued an order enjoining MOWD to disconnect the water
service and subsequently to reconnect the service;
4. MOWD then filed a motion to dismiss based on 2 grounds: 1) lack of
jurisdiction of respondent Court and 2) another action pending between the
same parties for the same causes;
5. Respond Court dismissed the case but not based on the grounds above
mentioned but because there was no malice or bad faith in the severance
of the water connection of petitioner and that MOWD had already
reconnected the same.

Issue: WON, respondent court gravely abused its discretion in dismissing

the case based on the ground which is not alleged in the motion to dismiss
of MOWD

Held: YES.
1. The dismissal of an actions on grounds not alleged in the motion to dismiss
is improper for in so doing, a court in effect dismiss an action motu propio
w/out giving Borje a chance to argue ithe point w/out receiving any
arguments or evidence in question.
2. Under Sec. 1 of Rule 8, it enumerates the grounds upon which an action
may be dismissed and it specifically ordains that a motion to this end be
filed. The only instance in which the court may dismiss upon a court’s own
motion on action is, when the “plaintiff fails to appear at the time of the
trial or to prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time or to
comply w/ the Rules or any order of the Court.
3. The dismissal of an action upon a motion to dismiss constitutes a denial of
due process, if from a consideration of the pleading it appears that there
are issues of fact which cannot be decided w/out the trial of the case on
the merits.