G.R. No. L-16286 - JANUARY 1960 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. No. L-16286January 30, 1960 Cesar Samson vs. Numeriano G. Estenzo G.R. No. L-14674January 30, 1960 Melecio R. Domingo, etc. vs. S.C. Moscoso, etc., et al. G.R. No. L-14535January 30, 1960 Benito Symaco vs. Paterio Aquino, etc. G.R. No. L-14375January 30, 1960 Andres Castillo, etc., et al. vs. Froilan Bayona, etc., et al. G.R. No. L-14373January 30, 1960 General Insurance and Surety Corporation vs. Ng Hua G.R. No. L-14327January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Bernardo Borja, et al. G.R. No. L-14310January 30, 1960 Mauro Prieto vs. Juan P. Enriquez, et al. G.R. No. L-14109January 30, 1960 National Lumber and Hardware Co. vs. Pedro J. Velasco G.R. No. L-14047January 30, 1960 Primo Panti, et al. vs. Provincial Board of Catanduanes, et al. G.R. No. L-14023January 30, 1960 Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc. vs. Court of Industrial Relations, et al. G.R. No. L-14016January 30, 1960 Alfredo Formoso, et al. vs. Delfin S. Flores, et al., et al. G.R. No. L-13781January 30, 1960 Testate Estate Jose J. Javellana vs. Jose A. Javellana, et al. G.R. No. L-13764January 30, 1960 Rafael Rueda vs. Marcelo Juan, et al. G.R. No. L-13564January 30, 1960 Andres Centenera vs. Nicasio Yatco, et al. G.R. No. L-13551January 30, 1960 Constancio Joaquin vs. Abundio Madrid, et al. G.R. No. L-13488January 30, 1960 Mauro Prieto vs. Higinio B. Macadaeg, et al. G.R. No. L-13456January 30, 1960 Irineo C. Hamoy vs. Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, et al. G.R. No. L-13399January 30, 1960 Alberta Vicencio, et al. vs. Gavino Tumalad, et al. G.R. No. L-13274January 30, 1960 Remedios Saclolo, et al. vs. Court of Agrarian Relations, et al. G.R. No. L-13160January 30, 1960 Bienvenido Nera vs. Paulino Garcia G.R. No. L-13146January 30, 1960 Valentin Castillo vs. Arturo Samonte G.R. No. L-12754January 30, 1960 Estanislao Alfonso vs. Pasay City G.R. No. L-12692January 30, 1960 Cosmic Lumber Company, Inc. vs. Gapita Manaois G.R. No. L-12661January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Aranda G.R. No. L-12280January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Pio Templonuevo G.R. No. L-12105January 30, 1960 Testate Estate of C.O. Bohanan, et al. vs. Magdalena C. Bohanan, et al. G.R. No. L-11908January 30, 1960 Flora Compañero, et al. vs. Apolonio T. Coloma, et al. G.R. No. L-11756January 30, 1960 Jose B. Gamboa, et al. vs. Ma-Ao Sugar Central Company, Inc. G.R. No. L-11430January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Tomas Estacio, et al. G.R. No. L-11215January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Quirino Baloyo, et al. G.R. No. L-9483January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Elias Nana, et al. G.R. No. L-6406January 30, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Kusain Saik, et al. G.R. No. L-16360January 29, 1960 Filemon Salcedo, Jr. vs. Commissiion on Elections, et al. G.R. No. L-14359January 29, 1960 In re: Salvadora Ong Salvadora Ong, et al. vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. L-14341January 29, 1960 Marciano Songahid vs. Benito Cinco G.R. No. L-14036January 29, 1960 Pablo Calion, et al. vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. L-14027January 29, 1960 Libertad Altavas Conlu vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-13956January 29, 1960 Romulo C. Nicolas, et al. vs. Fulgencio Dacara, et al. G.R. No. L-13536January 29, 1960 Adriano Valdez vs. Rodrigo Ocumen, et al. G.R. No. L-13489January 29, 1960 Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Jose J. Gonzales G.R. No. L-13194January 29, 1960 Buenaventura T. Saldana vs. Philippine Guaranty Company, Inc., et al. G.R. No. L-12981January 29, 1960 In re: Marciano Deetuanka Marciano Deetuanka vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. L-12614 and L-12615January 29, 1960 Juan Estella, et al. vs. Register of Deeds of Rizal G.R. No. L-12573January 29, 1960 Paulina Duran vs. Bernardino Pagarigan G.R. No. L-12476January 29, 1960 Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Anglo California National Bank, et al. G.R. No. L-9075January 29, 1960 S.V.S. Pictures, Inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-12092January 28, 1960 People of the Philippines vs. Lim Ho, et al. G.R. No. L-10854January 27, 1960 Manila Polo Club vs. Bibiano L. Meer, etc. G.R. No. L-16413January 26, 1960 Emilio C. Santos vs. Commission on Elections, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Cesar Samson vs. Numeriano G. Estenzo Melecio R. Domingo, etc. vs. S.C. Moscoso, etc., et al. Benito Symaco vs. Paterio Aquino, etc. Andres Castillo, etc., et al. vs. Froilan Bayona, etc., et al. General Insurance and Surety Corporation vs. Ng Hua People of the Philippines vs. Bernardo Borja, et al. Mauro Prieto vs. Juan P. Enriquez, et al. National Lumber and Hardware Co. vs. Pedro J. Velasco Primo Panti, et al. vs. Provincial Board of Catanduanes, et al. Talisay-Silay Milling Co., Inc. vs. Court of Industrial Relations, et al. Alfredo Formoso, et al. vs. Delfin S. Flores, et al., et al. Testate Estate Jose J. Javellana vs. Jose A. Javellana, et al. Rafael Rueda vs. Marcelo Juan, et al. Andres Centenera vs. Nicasio Yatco, et al. Constancio Joaquin vs. Abundio Madrid, et al. Mauro Prieto vs. Higinio B. Macadaeg, et al. Irineo C. Hamoy vs. Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources, et al. Alberta Vicencio, et al. vs. Gavino Tumalad, et al. Remedios Saclolo, et al. vs. Court of Agrarian Relations, et al. Bienvenido Nera vs. Paulino Garcia Valentin Castillo vs. Arturo Samonte Estanislao Alfonso vs. Pasay City Cosmic Lumber Company, Inc. vs. Gapita Manaois People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Aranda People of the Philippines vs. Pio Templonuevo Testate Estate of C.O. Bohanan, et al. vs. Magdalena C. Bohanan, et al. Flora Compañero, et al. vs. Apolonio T. Coloma, et al. Jose B. Gamboa, et al. vs. Ma-Ao Sugar Central Company, Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Tomas Estacio, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Quirino Baloyo, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Elias Nana, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Kusain Saik, et al. Filemon Salcedo, Jr. vs. Commissiion on Elections, et al. In re: Salvadora Ong Salvadora Ong, et al. vs. Republic of the Philippines Marciano Songahid vs. Benito Cinco Pablo Calion, et al. vs. People of the Philippines Libertad Altavas Conlu vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Romulo C. Nicolas, et al. vs. Fulgencio Dacara, et al. Adriano Valdez vs. Rodrigo Ocumen, et al. Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Jose J. Gonzales Buenaventura T. Saldana vs. Philippine Guaranty Company, Inc., et al. In re: Marciano Deetuanka Marciano Deetuanka vs. Republic of the Philippines Juan Estella, et al. vs. Register of Deeds of Rizal Paulina Duran vs. Bernardino Pagarigan Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Anglo California National Bank, et al. S.V.S. Pictures, Inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Lim Ho, et al. Manila Polo Club vs. Bibiano L. Meer, etc. Emilio C. Santos vs. Commission on Elections, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-16286 January 30, 1960
DR. CESAR SAMSON,petitioner,
vs.
HON. NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Leyte, 13th Judicial District, 5th Branch at Ormoc City, and (Mrs.) ASUNCION CONUI OMEGA,respondents.
Victoriano C. Teleron, Cristobal S. Mendiola, Antonio G. Sumaijag, Benjamin Togonon and Norberto Quisumbing for petitioner.
Tan S. Nuquid for respondents.
CONCEPCION,J.:
This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition to enjoin the Court of First Instance of Leyte, presided over by respondent Judge, Hon. Numeriano G. Estenzo, from enforcing its order of December 1, 1959, to open the ballot boxes of Precincts Nos. 8, 17 and 28, of Ormoc City and make a recount of the votes therein cast. The petition, likewise, contained a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction, which we issued upon the filing of the requisite bond.
Petitioner Dr. Cesar Samson and respondent herein Mrs. Asuncion Conui Omega, were, among others, candidates for councilor of the City of Ormoc in the general elections held on November 10, 1959. After a canvass by the City Board of Canvassers of the votes then cast, it appeared, on November 23, 1959, that Samson had garnered enough votes to be proclaimed as the last of the eight (8) councilors elected to the city council, with a plurality of three (3) votes over his nearest opponent, said Mrs. Conui Omega. However, on the same date, the latter filed with the aforementioned Court of First Instance a petition for the recounting of the votes cast in Precincts Nos. 17 and 28 of said city, upon the ground that the elections returns therefore, which gave her 68 votes in each precinct, were contradicted by the certification of the result of the election therein, incorporated on Form No. 8 of the Commission on Elections, according to which she got only 67 and 59 votes, respectively. On November 24, Mrs. Omega amended her petition by including in her request for recount the ballot box of Precinct No. 8 of Ormoc City, upon the ground that, in said precinct, "the . . . election result certified by the Board of Election Inspectors in the Transcript of Election Returns (Elec. see form) submitted to and as gathered by the 59th PC Company, Ormoc City, which is duly deputized agency of the Commission on Elections, only 41 votes were tallied infavor of Dr. Cesar Samson," whereas "the same Board of Election Inspectors . . . in another statement" (referring to the election returns), "certified that the same candidate Dr. Cesar Samson got 71 votes". Upon the filing of said amended petition, the Court of First Instance issued an order enjoining the Municipal Board of Canvassers "from further proceeding with the canvass" until further orders, and, relying upon sections 163 and 168 of the Revised Election Code, the court issued on November 25, 1959, another order the dispositive part of which reads:
The Board of Canvassers is hereby directed to open the ballot boxes for precinct Nos. 8, 17 and 28 so that they may proceed to recount the votes of Dr. Samson and Mrs. Omega for the sole purpose of determining who is the elected candidate for city councilor.
Taking into account the fact that there are ten members of the Board of Canvassers, the members of the Board of Canvassers are hereby directed to divide themselves into three divisions so that each division of three may take care in the counting of votes in every precinct and the Chairman will act as the supervisor. Dr. Samson and Mrs. Omega may appoint watchers with one watcher from each said party for every division. The counting shall take place immediately before this Court.
A reconsideration of this order was denied by another order bearing the same date, which, likewise, stated that:
Taking into account that tomorrow is a special holiday and there is no probability that the said keys will arrive Ormoc City on that day, the said members of the Board of Canvassers will be opened before this Court on November 27, 1959 at 7:30 A.M., with notice to all the members of the Board of Canvassers, as well as to Attorneys Benjamin Tugonon, Mendiola, Teleron, and Brocoy, in open court.
A motion for reconsideration of the latter order having had the same fate. Dr. Samson instituted the present case, for the purpose adverted to above.
At the outset, it is clear that insofar as they direct the Board of Canvassers to open the ballot boxes of Precincts Nos. 8, 17 and 28, the orders complained of are contrary to law. Respondents herein seem to have acted under the impressions that this case falls under section 168, in relation top section 163, of Republic Act No. 180, authorizing the recount of the votes cast in a given precinct when 'another copy or other authentic copies of the statement from an election precinct submitted to the board gives a candidate a different number of votes and the difference affects the result of the election . . . ." However, the recount so authorized, must be made by "the Court of First Instance" itself, not by theBoard of Canvassers, as ordered by respondent Judge. Moreover, said recount is authorized "for the sole purpose of determining", not "who is the elected candidate" as stated in the first order of respondent Judge, dated November 25, 1959, but"which is the true statementor which is the true result of the count of the votes cast" in the precincts in question.
Again, the alleged conflicts in the case at bar exist between the election returns, or statement of there count alluded to in section of said Act, on the one hand, and the certificate mentioned in section 153 thereof, on the other, and we have already held in Jose Parlade, et al.vs. Hon. Perfecto Quicho, et al., G.R. No. L-16259(December 29, 1959) that the aforementioned sections 163 and 168 are inapplicable to such situation.
Wherefore, the orders complained of are set aside and the writ of preliminary injunction issued herein is hereby made permanent, with costs against respondent Mrs. Asuncion Conui Omega. It is so ordered.
Bengzon, Padilla, Labrador, Reyes, J.B.L., and Barrera, JJ.,concur.