G.R. No.

243366

Felicitas Belo vs. Carlita Marcantonio

September 8, 2020

Facts:

Felicitas Belo and Carlita Marcantonio are in a legal battle over the ownership of a prime parcel
of land in a bustling urban area. The dispute stems from the lineage of ownership and the intricacies of
land transactions. Belo's claim is based on a purportedly valid deed of absolute sale executed in her favor
by the registered owner of the property. However, Marcantonio challenges this, claiming it is a
fabrication and that the true ownership lies with her.
The dispute intensifies as both parties present evidence before the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
which ultimately affirms Marcantonio as the lawful owner. Belo then takes her case to the Court of
Appeals, hoping for a reversal of fortunes. However, the Court of Appeals upholds the RTC's ruling,
solidifying Marcantonio's position as the rightful owner. Belo then escalates the matter to the Supreme
Court, which is now the ultimate arbiter in this protracted legal saga. The Supreme Court is tasked with
deciphering the complexities of land ownership and unraveling the truth behind conflicting claims.

Issues:

Whether the respondent may be granted relief from the Regional Trial Court's (RTC) default
order.

Ruling:

YES. The Supreme Court has ruled that a respondent may be granted relief from the Regional
Trial Court's default order. The court considered the respondent's reasons for her absence, such as illness
or force majeure, and whether she acted promptly in seeking relief. After a thorough review, the court
found that the respondent had provided valid justifications for her absence and had taken steps to seek
redress. No evidence of willful or deliberate disregard for the judicial process was found. The court ruled
that the respondent had provided valid justifications for her absence and had promptly sought redress.
The court ordered the RTC to set aside its default order, allowing the respondent to participate fully in
the proceedings and present her case on the merits. This decision upholds the principles of due process
and guarantees the respondent's right to a fair and impartial adjudication of the case.