G.R. No.

144025 December 27, 2002

SPS. RENE GONZAGA and LERIO GONZAGA, petitioners,
vs.
HON. COURT OF APPEALS, Second Division, Manila,
HON. QUIRICO G. DEFENSOR, Judge, RTC, Branch 36, Sixth Judicial Region, Iloilo City,
and LUCKY HOMES, INC., represented by WILSON JESENA, JR., as Manager, respondents.

FACTS:

 The spouses bought Lot 19 from LUCKY HOMES

 The said lot was mortgaged by the spouses to SSS
 However, LUCK HOMES mistakenly identified LOT 19 as LOT 18
 Hence, the spouses constructed their house on LOT 18
 LUCKY HOMES informed the spouses about the error
 The spouses then offered to buy lot 18 and continued to stay on the lot
 When the spouses defaulted in paying SSS: the latter then foreclosed the LOT 19 it being the lot
mortgaged. A new title was then issued in favour of SSS
 The Spouses went to lucky homes asking that for swapping of lots and reformation of contract.
 However, LUCKY homes refused

Hence, the spouses filed a case before the RTC

RTC: DISMISSED THE CASE

1. The spouses are no longer the owner of LOT 19.

2. They are also not the owner of lot 18 since they only offered to buy the said lot
3. The contract cannot be reformed anymore since the spouses are no lonher the owner of the lot
and the contract clearly reflected the intentions of the party.
- The real object of the contract is really Lot 19.
- Lucky homes only made an error in physically identifying the lot.
4. To allow reformation and swapping will leave lucky homes with nothing and the spouses will
unjustly enrich themselves

 Then, the spouses went to the CA raising that Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB)
has the proper jurisdiction of the case and not the RTC

CA: MAINTAINED RTC

 - The spouses are estopped from questioning the jurisdiction of the case

ISSUE: WHETHER THE SPOUSES ARE ESTOPPED FROM ASSAILING THE JURISDICTION OF THE TRIAL
COURT

SUPREME COURT:

YES

- A party cannot invoke the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief against his
opponent and, after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate, or question that
same jurisdiction
- It was petitioners themselves who invoked the jurisdiction of the court a quo by instituting
an action for reformation of contract against private respondents.
- It appears that, in the proceedings before the trial court, petitioners vigorously asserted
their cause from start to finish. Not even once did petitioners ever raise the issue of the
court’s jurisdiction during the entire proceedings which lasted for two years