Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Office of the City Legal Officer for petitioners. chanroble s virtual law lib rary
QUIASON, J.:
The Order dated March 28, 1994 granted the motion of private
respondent to compel petitioner Mayor Alfredo S. Lim to issue a
permit or license in favor of private respondent pursuant to
Ordinance No. 7065 upon compliance by private respondent with
all the requirements set thereunder. chanro blesvi rt ualawlib ra rychan roble s vi rtual law lib rary
The Order dated April 11, 1994 denied the motion for
reconsideration filed by petitioners of the Order dated May 28,
1994. chanroblesv irt ualawli bra rychan rob les vi rtual law lib rary
The Order dated April 20, 1994 reiterated the order of March 28,
1994, directing Mayor Lim to immediately issue to private
respondent the necessary permit or license pursuant to Ordinance
No. 7065.
I
chan roble s virtual law l ib rary
Sec. 2. The Mayor and the City Treasurer or their duly authorized
representatives are hereby empowered to inspect at all times
during regular business hours the books, records and accounts of
the establishment, as well as to prescribe the manner in which
the books and financial statements of the entrepreneur shall be
kept. chanroblesvi rt ualawlib ra rychan rob les vi rtual law lib rary
Sec. 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. chan roble svirtualawl ibra rycha nro bles vi rtua l law lib ra ry
Enacted originally by the Municipal Board on September 7, 1971;
vetoed by the Mayor on September 27, 1971; modified and
amended by the Municipal Board at its regular session today,
October 12, 1971. chanro blesvi rt ualawlib ra rychan roble s virtual law lib rary
Less than two months after P.D. No. 771 was issued, the
Philippine Jai-Alai and Amusement Corporation, an enterprise
controlled by Alfredo Romualdez, a brother-in-law of President
Marcos, was granted a franchise to operate a jai-alai within the
Greater Manila Area under P.D. No. 810. chanroblesv irt ualawli bra rycha nrob les vi rtual law lib rary
With the withdrawal of the appeal, the judgment in Civil Case No.
45560 became final and executory and was entered in the Book
of Entries of Judgment of the Court of Appeals on May 26, 1989
and in the Book of Entries of Judgment of the Regional Trial Court
on October 27, 1992. chanroblesvi rtualaw lib raryc han robles v irt ual law li bra ry
The City of Manila filed with this Court another case for
declaratory judgment to nullify the franchise to operate a jai-alai
under Ordinance No. 7065 (G.R. No. 101768). The petition was
dismissed in a resolution dated October 3, 1991 "for lack of
jurisdiction." chanroble s virtual law l ibra ry
II
cha nrob les vi rtua l law lib rary
The City of Manila should have pursued in the appellate courts its
appeal questioning the dismissal of Civil Case No. 91-58913,
where the trial court ruled that Mayor Lopez and the city could no
longer claim that Ordinance No. 7065 had been canceled by
President Marcos because they failed to raise this issue in Civil
Case No 88-54660. chanroble svi rtualawl ib rary chan rob les vi rtual law lib rary
We find nothing in said Rules to support petitioners' posture. chanroble svi rtualaw lib raryc han robles v irt ual law li bra ry
Upon the receipt of such certification [of the Clerk of Court that
the appeal has been dismissed] in the lower court the case shall
stand there as though no appeal had ever been taken, and the
judgment of the said court may be enforced with the additional
costs allowed by the appellate court upon dismissing the appeal.
The phrase "the case shall stand there as if no appeal has been
taken" refers to the manner of how the judgment may be
enforced as can be gleaned from the phrase following it that "the
judgment of said court may be enforced with the additional costs
allowed by the appellate court . . ." In other words, the judgment
shall be executed in accordance with its original disposition, no
modifications thereof having been ordered by the Court of
Appeals.chan roblesv irt ualawli bra rycha nrob les vi rtua l law lib rary
Said Rule and law refer to appeals to the Supreme Court from the
decisions of the Regional Trial Court. Clearly, they do not involved
the review of orders of the Regional Trial Court rendered after the
decision of the trial court has become final and executory. Such a
review must be taken under
Rule 65, which can be given due course only when there is a
showing of lack or excess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of
discretion on the part of the trial court (Revised Rules of Court,
Rule 67, Section 1; Planter's Products v. Court of Appeals, 193
SCRA 563 [1991]). We find no abuse of discretion, much less lack
of or excess of jurisdiction, on the part of respondent judge. chanroblesvi rt ualawlib ra rychan rob les vi rtual law lib rary
WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is DISMISSED. chanrob lesvi rtua lawlib rary chan robles v irt ual law l ibra ry
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, and Kapunan, JJ. concur. chanro blesvi rt ualawlib ra rychan roble s virtual law lib rary