Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor

In 1991 the Balanes sued Bertuldo Hinog in the RTC of Tagbilaran City for recovery of ownership and possession of a 1,399-square-meter lot, removal of construction and damages "in amounts justified by the evidence." They alleged that they had allowed him to use part of the lot for ten years at a nominal rent, and that he refused to leave and instead claimed ownership. Bertuldo answered, claiming ownership through a 1980 deed of sale. After the plaintiffs rested, Bertuldo died in 1998 before completing his evidence. His new counsel moved to expunge the complaint and nullify all proceedings because the correct docket fees had not been paid, citing Manchester. The RTC expunged the complaint but allowed payment of the deficiency, and, on payment, reinstated the case by order of March 22, 1999. Petitioners did not seek reconsideration of that order; they instead filed a supplemental pleading, which was denied. They then argued that there was no case left to reinstate. The RTC denied their motions, citing Sun Insurance, and directed counsel to comply with Section 16, Rule 3 on substitution. Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition directly with the Supreme Court.

1. 1Whether the direct filing of the petition with the Supreme Court violated the hierarchy of courts.
2. 2Whether the trial court gravely abused its discretion in reinstating the complaint upon payment of the deficient docket fees.

The petition was dismissed. Although the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and RTCs share concurrent jurisdiction to issue the extraordinary writs, that concurrence gives no "unrestricted freedom of choice of court forum" (People v. Cuaresma). Direct resort to the Supreme Court is allowed only for special and important reasons clearly set out in the petition, and none was shown here. That failure alone was "sufficient cause for the dismissal of the petition." On the merits, the reinstatement order was interlocutory and not subject to a reglementary period. The remedy against it is ordinarily to proceed to trial and appeal, not certiorari. Having sought affirmative relief through their supplemental pleading, petitioners were estopped from challenging the court's jurisdiction. Under Sun Insurance, payment of the prescribed fee is jurisdictional, but non-payment at filing does not automatically cause dismissal if the fee is paid within the prescriptive or reglementary period. The action, a real action, prescribes in thirty years, and the Balanes had relied in good faith on the clerk's assessment. Their prayer for damages in unspecified amounts did not warrant dismissal, since fees for such awards constitute a lien on the judgment. Bertuldo had also raised no objection for over seven years, so his heirs, who stepped into his shoes, were barred by estoppel. The Court noted that counsel had no standing until substitution under Section 16, Rule 3, but that the defect had since been corrected.