Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

 

Home of Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

www.chanrobles.com

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-4008. August 7, 1907. ]

AGUSTIN GARCIA GAVIERES, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WILLIAM ROBINSON, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

Jose Ma. Marcaida, for Appellant.

C.W. O’Brien, for Appellees.

SYLLABUS


INJUNCTION. — The Supreme Court has jurisdiction to grant a preliminary injunction in cases pending therein on bills of exceptions (Watson & Co. v. Enriquez, 1 Phil. Rep., 480), and may also grant a preliminary injunction in certain original actions such as mandamus, certiorari, prohibition and quo warranto. (Sec. 517, Code of Civil Procedure.) In original actions like the present seeking an injunction, however, the court is without jurisdiction.


D E C I S I O N


WILLARD, J.:


On the 3d day of May, 1907, a bill of exceptions was filed in this court in a case in which Agustin Garcia Gavieres was plaintiff appellant, and the administrators of the intestate estate of Luisa Peña and William Robinson were defendants. On the 4th day of May a document was presented in this court by Agustin Garcia Gavieres in an action entitled Agustin Garcia Gavieres v. William Robinson and the sheriff of Manila, Defendants. A summons was issued in due form by the clerk of this court, requiring the said defendants to appeal and answer the complaint. On the 5th day of June they appealed and demurred to the complaint and the case is now before us for decision upon the demurrer.

The prayer of the complaint in the original proceeding in this court is that a preliminary injunction be issued against the defendants, William Robinson and the sheriff of Manila, restraining them from selling the property in a certain bar and restaurant called "The San Sebastian Saloon."cralaw virtua1aw library

This court has jurisdiction to grant a preliminary injunction in cases pending herein on bills of exceptions. (Watson & Co. v. Enriquez, 1 Phil. Rep., 480.)

It also has power to grant a preliminary injunction in certain original actions, such as mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, and quo warranto. (Code of Civil Procedure, sec. 517.)

This is not one of the last-named proceedings, nor do we think it can be called a motion made in the case pending here on the bill of exceptions. It will be noticed that the parties to this original proceeding in this court are not the same as the parties in the case brought here by the bill of exceptions. The administrators of the estate of Luisa Peña are not made parties to this proceeding, while they are defendants in the other case.

It appears then that the plaintiffs have commenced an original action in this court, asking for an injunction. The court has no jurisdiction of such an action.

The demurrer of the defendants is sustained and the plaintiff is allowed five days from the date of this order in which to amend the complaint. If no such amendment is presented within such time, the clerk, without further order of this court, will enter a final judgment in favor of the defendants and against the plaintiff, with costs. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Johnson, and Tracey, JJ., concur.

HomeJurisprudenceSupreme Court Decisions1923 : Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsDecember 1923 : Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsTop of Page