ENRIQUETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE - July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

11/15/22, 3:52 PM G.R. No. L-58268 July 5, 1982 - ENRIQUETA S. TY v.
ETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE : July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
Home Law Firm Law Library Laws
Jurisprudence

Search

ChanRobles
Professional
Review, Inc.
July 1982 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme
Court Jurisprudence

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1982 >

July 1982 Decisions >
G.R. No. L-58268 July 5, 1982 -
ENRIQUETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE:

ChanRobles On-

Line Bar Review
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. L-58268. July 5, 1982.]
ENRIQUETA S. TY, CANDELARIA C. LUMAGBAS,

FELIPE LUMAGBAS, TIBURCIO LUMAGBAS and
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1982julydecisions.php?id=288 1/15
11/15/22, 3:52 PM G.R. No. L-58268 July 5, 1982 - ENRIQUETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE : July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

MELECIO LUMAGBAS, Petitioners, v. EUSTAQUIA
ELALE, CONSORCIO ELALE, SOTERA ELALETULBO,
MACARIO TULBO, MOISES BALAIS and COURT OF
APPEALS, Respondents.
SYNOPSIS
The Court of Agrarian Relations rendered a decision

ordering the reinstatement of respondents as tenants
in two parcels of coconut land and the petitioners to
pay the former actual, moral and exemplary damages
plus attorney’s fees. Petitioners appealed to the Court
of Appeals which affirmed the agrarian court’s decision.
Their motion to set aside the decision on the ground
ChanRobles CPA
that they were not given a chance to file a
Review Online
memorandum was denied by the appellate court.

Thirty-two (32) days after receipt of the resolution

denying their motion, petitioners mailed to the
Supreme Court a petition for certiorari praying that the
appellate court’s decision be set aside but the same
was denied for having been filed late. Their motion for
reconsideration was likewise denied because a motion
for reconsideration is not allowed in the Court of
Appeals under Section 18 of Presidential Decree No.
946. Petitioners filed the instant second motion for
reconsideration.
The Supreme Court, in denying the petitioners’ second

motion for reconsideration, held that (1) the decision of
ChanRobles Special the Court of Appeals had already become final and
Lecture Series
executory and can no longer be reviewed; and (2) the
Court of Appeals is empowered by Presidential Decree
No. 946 to dispense with memoranda in deciding
agrarian cases in the interest of the expeditious
administration of justice.
Motion for reconsideration denied.

SYLLABUS
1. REMEDIAL. LAW; APPEALS, AGRARIAN CASES;

PARTIES MUST DIRECTLY APPEAL TO THE SUPREME
COURT. — The petitioners committed a mistake in filing
a motion for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals.
They should have appealed right away to this Court
within the reglementary thirty-day period. In agrarian
cases, a motion for reconsideration is not allowed in
the Court of Appeals by Section 18 of Presidential
Decree No. 946.
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; DENIAL OF MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION WHEN COURT OF APPEALS

DECISION ALREADY FINAL. — The second motion for

reconsideration filed by petitioners before this Court

has to be denied because the decision of the Court of
Appeals had already become final and executory and
July-1982
can no longer be reviewed by this Court.
Jurisprudence

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
G.R. No. L-45245 FILED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT CANNOT BE

TREATED AS CERTIORARI. — The petition filed in this
July 2, 1982 - PEOPLE
Court cannot be treated as a special civil action of
OF THE PHIL. v.
MARCELINO T. certiorari because the Court of Appeals did not act with
grave abuse of discretion or in excess of jurisdiction
GABILAN
and did not depart from the accepted and usual course

G.R. No. L-57573 of judicial proceedings in resolving the appeal of
July 5, 1982 - petitioners without first requiring the parties to file
DIRECTOR OF LANDS memoranda.
v. ERNESTO DATU
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; COURT OF APPEALS MAY DISPENSE

WITH THE FILING OF MEMORANDA. — In the interest

G.R. No. L-58268
of the expeditious administration of justice, Presidential
July 5, 1982 -
Decree No. 946 empowers the Court of Appeals to
ENRIQUETA S. TY v.
dispense with memoranda in deciding agrarian cases.
EUSTAQUIA ELALE
As in the instant case, the Court of Appeals did not

require the filing of memoranda because after a perusal

G.R. No. L-27546
July 16, 1982 - of the record it presumably concluded that the appeal
PHILIPPINE CHARITY was manifestly without merit or was palpably frivolous
SWEEPSTAKES and dilatory because the lower court’s findings are
OFFICE v. ASSOC. OF supported by evidence.
SWEEPSTAKES STAFF
PERSONNEL 5. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; PARTIES SHOULD BE NOTIFIED

THAT CASE IS SUBMITTED FOR DECISION WITHOUT
G.R. No. L-30595 MEMORANDA. — As a matter of orderly procedure and
July 16, 1982 - to dispel the impression that a litigant in an agrarian
MAGDALENA S. case has been denied due process or was not accorded
JOSON v. FORTUNATO a hearing in the Court of Appeals, it is advisable that if
CRISOSTOMO the appellate court finds that memoranda are not

necessary, it should at least issue a notice to the
G.R. Nos. L-32694 parties that the case is submitted for decision without
& L-33119 July 16, any memoranda.
1982 - FIDEL
SILVESTRE v. COURT 6. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; MANIFESTATION BY APPELLANT

OF APPEALS TO FILE MEMORANDUM UPON PAYMENT OF DOCKET

FEES. — It is likewise advisable that an appellant who
G.R. No. L-36094 desires to file a memorandum should manifest to the
July 16, 1982 - Court of Appeals when he remits the amount for the
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. payment of the docket and legal research fees that he
v. ANASTACIO wants to submit a memorandum.
DELASA
G.R. No. L-30269 RESOLUTION

July 19, 1982 -
EPITACIO BUERANO
v. COURT OF AQUINO, J.:

APPEALS
G.R. No. L-40432 The Court of Agrarian Relations at Catarman, Northern

July 19, 1982 - Samar in its decision dated December 15, 1980 in CAR
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. Case No. 312, Eustaquia Elale, Et. Al. v. Enriqueta S.
v. FERNANDO FELIPE Ty, Et Al., ordered the reinstatement of Eustaquia Elale,

her son Consorcio, her daughter Sotera E. Tulbo, her
G.R. No. L-41543 grandson Macario Tulbo and one Moises Balais as
July 19, 1982 - tenants in two parcels of coconut land, with an area of
LEANDRO SEDECO v. about one and a half hectares, located at Barrio
COURT OF APPEALS Mayana, Guiuan, Eastern Samar.
G.R. No. L-51458 The Agrarian Court found that Eustaquia (an
July 19, 1982 - octogenarian who claimed to have been a tenant since
1917) and Consorcio were allegedly ejected from the
MANUEL YAP v. land after they were arrested on a charge of qualified

COURT OF APPEALS theft and that in order to be released from

imprisonment they thumbmarked a memorandum
G.R. No. L-52498 wherein they agreed to vacate the land (Exh. A or 1).
July 19, 1982 - JESUS
B. PACQUING v. In the said decision, the lower court required Enriqueta

COURT OF APPEALS S. Ty and the spouses, Felipe Lumagbas and Candelaria

Lumagbas, and their two sons Tiburcio and Melecio
A.M. No. 1895-CFI (the tenants recognized by Enriqueta on the same
July 20, 1982 - land) to pay Eustaquia Elale Et. Al. actual damages of
LAMBERTO MACIAS v. P500, moral and exemplary damages of P2,000 and
GIBSON ARAULA attorney’s fees in the sum of P1,000 (p. 77, Rollo).
A.C. No. 2160 July From that decision, Enriqueta S. Ty, the Lumagbas
20, 1982 - AVELINO spouses and their two sons seasonably appealed to the
FRAN v. JUANITO Court of Appeals. The record was received in the
FUERTE Appellate Court on February 16, 1981. The case was

raffled on March 24, 1981. Without any further
A.M. No. 2691-CFI ceremony and as may be seen on page 4 of the Rollo,
July 20, 1982 - the Court of Appeals decided the appeal on April 22,
ARTEMIO T. VICTORIA 1981. It affirmed the lower court’s judgment on the
v. SEGUNDO M. ZOSA ground that it is supported by substantial evidence

(CA-G.R. No. SP-12201-CAR).
chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
G.R. No. L-30201
July 20, 1982 - A copy of that decision was received by appellants’

CARMEN P. URBANO counsel on May 8, 1981. Four days later, or on May 12,
v. J. M. TUASON & he mailed to the Court of Appeals a motion to set aside
CO., INC. the decision on the ground that the appellants were not

given a chance to file a brief or memorandum.
G.R. No. L-31682
July 20, 1982 - They alleged that in their memorandum they would
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. have pointed out the evidence showing that Eustaquia
v. VIRGILIO Elale and the members of her family were the tools of
NACUSPAG Jose Abuda in occupying the said coconut land and that

Abuda’s purpose was to use that circumstance to
G.R. No. L-32661 support his civil action against Alberto S. Ty for the
July 20, 1982 - recovery of the land (Civil Case No. 472.)
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. CESAR DE LA CRUZ They further alleged that plaintiffs-appellees Eustaquia

Elale Et. Al. failed to include Alberto S. Ty, the
landowner (Exh. 2), as a defendant and that defendant
G.R. No. L-34840 Enriqueta S. Ty, who is Alberto’s stepmother, was only
July 20, 1982 - his overseer. Appellees Eustaquia Elale Et. Al. opposed
MARIO RODIS the motion for reconsideration.
MAGASPI v. JOSE R.
RAMOLETE The Court of Appeals in its resolution of July 24, 198l

denied the motion. Appellants’ counsel received a copy
G.R. No. L-35333 of that resolution on August 14, 1981. Thirty-two days
July 20, 1982 - FELIX later, or on September 15, 1981, the counsel for
M. SULIT v. JOEL P. Enriqueta S. Ty, the Lumagbas spouses and their two
TIANGCO children mailed to this Court a petition for certiorari

wherein they prayed that the decision of the Court of
G.R. No. L-37751 Appeals be set aside and that the Lumagbas spouses
July 20, 1982 - be declared the rightful tenants of the land.
MANUEL LAPINIG v.
COURT OF APPEALS We denied the petition for having been filed late. The

petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration which we
G.R. No. L-38140 also denied. The petitioners committed a mistake in
July 20, 1982 - filing a motion for reconsideration in the Court of
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. Appeals. They should have appealed right away to this
v. ABUNDIO LABINIA Court within the reglementary thirty-day period. In

agrarian cases, a motion for reconsideration is not
G.R. No. L-38440 allowed in the Court of Appeals by section 18 of
July 20, 1982 - Presidential Decree No. 946.
DOMINGO V. FLORES,
JR. v. JUAN PONCE In this Court the petitioners filed a second motion for
ENRILE reconsideration dated January 21, 1982. That motion

has to be denied also because the decision of the Court
G.R. No. L-41399 of Appeals had already become final and executory and
July 20, 1982 - can no longer be reviewed by this Court.
REPUBLIC OF
PHILIPPINES v. The petition filed in this Court cannot be treated as a

CESAR GUY special civil action of certiorari because the Court of

Appeals did not act with grave abuse of discretion or in
G.R. No. L-41958 excess of jurisdiction and did not depart from the
July 20, 1982 - accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings in
DONALD MEAD v. resolving the appeal of petitioners Enriqueta S. Ty Et.
MANUEL A. ARGEL Al. without first requiring the parties to file

memoranda.
chanrobles.com:cralaw:red
G.R. No. L-42963
July 20, 1982 - Presidential Decree No. 946 does not make it
mandatory upon the Court of Appeals to require the
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. parties to file memoranda as may be seen from the
v. REINO P. ROLL following provisions:
jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
G.R. No. L-46954 "SEC. 18. Appeals. — . . .
July 20, 1982 -
ELPIDIO YABES, ET "The Court of Appeals shall affirm the decision or order
AL. v. NAPOLEON or the portions thereof appealed from if the findings of
FLOJO, ET AL. fact in the said decision or order are supported by

substantial evidence as basis thereof, and the
G.R. No. L-47740 conclusions stated therein are not clearly against the
July 20, 1982 - LIM law and jurisprudence . . .
PIN v. CONCHITA
LIAO TAN "x x x
G.R. No. L-47953 "Upon receipt of the records of the case from the Court
July 20, 1982 - LILIA of Agrarian Relations, the Court of Appeals may, if it
B. GALCERAN v. deems necessary, require the parties to file
SECRETARY OF simultaneous memoranda within a non-extendible
LABOR period of fifteen (15) days from notice; the appellate

court shall decide the case within thirty (30) days from
G.R. No. L-50439 receipt of said records or memoranda.
July 20, 1982 -
ENRIQUE T. "No motion for rehearing or reconsideration shall be

YUCHENGCO, INC. v. allowed in the Court to Appeals.
CONRADO M. VELAYO

"x x x
G.R. No. L-52435
July 20, 1982 - It is evident that Presidential Decree No. 946 in the
ELIZABETH SINCLAIR interest of the expeditious administration of justice
v. COURT OF empowers the Court of Appeals to dispense with
APPEALS memoranda in deciding agrarian cases. In the instant

case, the Court of Appeals did not require the filing of
G.R. No. L-56554 memoranda because after a perusal of the record it
July 20, 1982 - SAN presumably concluded that the appeal was manifestly
MIGUEL without merit or was palpably frivolous and dilatory
CORPORATION v. because the lower court’s findings are supported by the
NATIONAL LABOR evidence.
RELATIONS
COMMISSION Notwithstanding the foregoing, we hold that. as a

matter of orderly procedure and to dispel the
impression that a litigant in an agrarian case has been
G.R. No. L-56833 denied due process or was not accorded a hearing in
July 20, 1982 - the Court of Appeals, it is advisable that if the
RAMON V. MERANO v. Appellate Court finds that memoranda are not
EDUARDO C. TUTAAN necessary, it should at least issue a notice to the

parties that the case is submitted for decision without
G.R. No. L-58011- any memoranda.
chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
12 July 20, 1982 -
VIR-JEN SHIPPING It is likewise advisable that an appellant who desires to

AND MARINE file a memorandum should manifest to the Court of
SERVICES, INC. v. Appeals, when he remits the amount for the payment
NATIONAL LABOR of the docket and legal research fees, that he wants to
RELATIONS submit a memorandum.
COMMISSION

WHEREFORE, petitioners’ second motion for
G.R. No. L-58678 reconsideration is denied for lack of merit. No costs.
July 20, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. SO ORDERED.
v. IRINEO V.
MENDOZA Barredo (Chairman), Concepcion Jr., Guerrero, De

Castro and Escolin, JJ., concur.
G.R. Nos. L-
58973-76 July 20, Abad Santos, JJ., concurs in the result.

1982 - INOCENTES
AMORA, JR. v. COURT
OF APPEALS
G.R. No. L-59519

Back to Home | Back to Main
July 20, 1982 -
ADELA FRANCISCO v.
ALFREDO M.
GORGONIO

G.R. No. L-35726

July 21, 1982 -
SOCIAL SECURITY
SYSTEM v. CITY OF
BACOLOD, ET AL.
201 Phil. 1

G.R. No. L-58289

July 24, 1982 -
VALENTINO L.
LEGASPI v. MINISTER
OF FINANCE
201 Phil. 8

A.C. No. 792 July

30, 1982 - NATIONAL
BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION v.
JESUS M. PONCE
201 Phil. 37

A.C. No. 906 July

30, 1982 - TERESITA
B. TABILIRAN v. JOSE
C. TABILIRAN, JR.
201 Phil. 40

A.C. No. 1182 July

30, 1982 - ISABELO
C. ORIJUELA v.
TEMISTOCLES A.
ROSARIO
201 Phil. 45

A.C. No. 2343 July

30, 1982 - FACUNDO
LUBIANO v. JOEL G.
GORDOLLA
201 Phil. 47

A.M. No. 2397-MJ

July 30, 1982 -
ERNESTO D. BONILLA
v. LEONARDO AFABLE
201 Phil. 52

A.M. No. 2681-CFI

July 30, 1982 -
GEORGE O. JAVIER v.
MANUEL E.
VALENZUELA
201 Phil. 56

G.R. No. L-26676

July 30, 1982 -
PHILIPPINE REFINING
CO., INC. v. NG SAM
201 Phil. 61

G.R. No. L-28692

July 30, 1982 -
CONRADA VDA. DE
ABETO v. PHILIPPINE
AIR LINES, INC.
201 Phil. 82

G.R. No. L-29376

July 30, 1982 -
MARIANO WONG v.
REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES
201 Phil. 69

G.R. No. L-30279

July 30, 1982 - PHIL.
NATIONAL BANK v.
PHIL. NATIONAL
BANK EMPLOYEES
ASSOCIATION (PEMA)
201 Phil. 89

G.R. No. L-30456

July 30, 1982 -
VIRGILIO S.
VELAZCO CAVITE v.
EMILIA S. BLAS
201 Phil. 122

G.R. No. L-30738

July 30, 1982 -
BOARD OF
LIQUIDATORS v.
JOSE ZULUETA
201 Phil. 131

G.R. No. L-31818

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. EDMUNDO
GADIANO
201 Phil. 143

G.R. Nos. L-
32144-45 July 30,
1982 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v. NAÑO L.
MILFLORES
201 Phil. 154

G.R. No. L-32463

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. JOSE L. BATOY
201 Phil. 179
G.R. No. L-32997

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ANICETO PEDROSO
201 Phil. 184

G.R. No. L-33169

July 30, 1982 -
GLICERIO JAVELLANA
v. CESAR KINTANAR

G.R. No. L-33327

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. FLORENTINO
ALMENDRAS
201 Phil. 211

G.R. Nos. L-
34527-28 July 30,
1982 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v.
DIONISIO
MAGBANUA
201 Phil. 219

G.R. No. L-35745

July 30, 1982 -
JULIANA VDA. DE
LICARDO v.
WORKMEN’S
COMPENSATION
COMMISSION
201 Phil. 247

G.R. No. L-35950

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ARNOLD ZURBITO
201 Phil. 256

G.R. Nos. L-
36662-63 July 30,
1982 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHIL. v.
FILOMENO CAMANO
201 Phil. 268

G.R. No. L-37270

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. MAGNO B. PABLO
201 Phil. 284

G.R. No. L-37632

July 30, 1982 -
GREGORIA VDA. DE
PAMAN v. ALBERTO V.
SEÑERIS
201 Phil. 290

G.R. No. L-38208

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ENECITO
VILLASON
201 Phil. 298

G.R. No. L-38544

July 30, 1982 - LUZ
E. BALITAAN v.
COURT OF FIRST
INSTANCE OF
BATANGAS

G.R. No. L-38859

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. DANILO VIZCARRA
201 Phil. 326

G.R. No. L-39966

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. MAXIMO
TABADERO
201 Phil. 340

G.R. No. L-40494

July 30, 1982 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. DOMINGO BURGOS
201 Phil. 353

G.R. No. L-49401

July 30, 1982 - RIZAL
COMMERCIAL
BANKING CORP. v.
JOSE P. ARRO
201 Phil. 362

G.R. No. L-55687

July 30, 1982 -
JUASING HARDWARE
v. RAFAEL T.
MENDOZA
201 Phil. 369
G.R. Nos. L-
57601-06 July 30,
1982 - LAZARO
VENIEGAS v. PEOPLE
OF THE PHIL.
201 Phil. 376

G.R. No. L-57841

July 30, 1982 -
BERNARDO GALLEGO
v. SANDIGANBAYAN

G.R. No. L-59283

July 30, 1982 -
CRISANTO MOLINO v.
COURT OF APPEALS
201 Phil. 385

G.R. No. L-60236

July 30, 1982 -
DOMESTIC SAVINGS
& LOAN ASSOC., INC.
v. MILAGROS
VILLAFANIA-CAGUIOA
201 Phil. 390

Copyright © 1995 - 2022 REDiaz

ENRIQUETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE - July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ENRIQUETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE - July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

11/15/22, 3:52 PM G.R. No. L-58268 July 5, 1982 - ENRIQUETA S. TY v.

ETA S. TY v. EUSTAQUIA ELALE : July 1982 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions

Home Law Firm Law Library Laws

July 1982 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1982 >

Line Bar Review

[G.R. No. L-58268. July 5, 1982.]

ENRIQUETA S. TY, CANDELARIA C. LUMAGBAS,

The Court of Agrarian Relations rendered a decision

memorandum was denied by the appellate court.

Thirty-two (32) days after receipt of the resolution

The Supreme Court, in denying the petitioners’ second

Motion for reconsideration denied.

1. REMEDIAL. LAW; APPEALS, AGRARIAN CASES;

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; DENIAL OF MOTION FOR

G.R. No. L-45245 FILED BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT CANNOT BE

G.R. No. L-57573 of judicial proceedings in resolving the appeal of

July 5, 1982 - petitioners without first requiring the parties to file

DIRECTOR OF LANDS memoranda.

4. ID.; ID.; ID.; COURT OF APPEALS MAY DISPENSE

WITH THE FILING OF MEMORANDA. — In the interest

require the filing of memoranda because after a perusal

PHILIPPINE CHARITY was manifestly without merit or was palpably frivolous

SWEEPSTAKES and dilatory because the lower court’s findings are

OFFICE v. ASSOC. OF supported by evidence.

PERSONNEL 5. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; PARTIES SHOULD BE NOTIFIED

SILVESTRE v. COURT 6. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; MANIFESTATION BY APPELLANT

G.R. No. L-30269 RESOLUTION

v. COURT OF AQUINO, J.:

G.R. No. L-40432 The Court of Agrarian Relations at Catarman, Northern

MANUEL YAP v. land after they were arrested on a charge of qualified

July 19, 1982 - JESUS

B. PACQUING v. In the said decision, the lower court required Enriqueta

chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

G.R. No. L-30201

July 20, 1982 - A copy of that decision was received by appellants’

G.R. No. L-31682

PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

v. CESAR DE LA CRUZ They further alleged that plaintiffs-appellees Eustaquia

RAMOLETE The Court of Appeals in its resolution of July 24, 198l

PHILIPPINES v. The petition filed in this Court cannot be treated as a

G.R. No. L-42963

G.R. No. L-46954 "SEC. 18. Appeals. — . . .

July 20, 1982 -

LIAO TAN "x x x

July 20, 1982 -

ENRIQUE T. "No motion for rehearing or reconsideration shall be

G.R. No. L-52435

COMMISSION Notwithstanding the foregoing, we hold that. as a

12 July 20, 1982 -

VIR-JEN SHIPPING It is likewise advisable that an appellant who desires to

July 20, 1982 -

PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. SO ORDERED.

MENDOZA Barredo (Chairman), Concepcion Jr., Guerrero, De

58973-76 July 20, Abad Santos, JJ., concurs in the result.

G.R. No. L-59519

G.R. No. L-35726

G.R. No. L-58289

A.C. No. 792 July

A.C. No. 906 July

A.C. No. 1182 July

A.C. No. 2343 July

A.M. No. 2397-MJ