In a 20-page unanimous decision, the Court’s second division denied the petition of Vicente delos Santos and his co-petitioners and affirmed the May 11, 1999 decision and Jan. 31, 2000 resolution of the Court of Appeals dismissing the case on a technicality.
"Such issue should have been first resolved by the CA, but it was not able to do so because of the dismissal of the appeal. Thus, the claim of ownership is a non-issue before this Court."
The Court said Delos Santos and his co-petitioners failed to file their motion for reconsideration before the CA within the 15-day reglementary period pursuant to the Rules of Court, which starts upon receipt of the notice of the decision or final order.
"With the loss of their right to appeal to the CA, we see no need to resolve the issue of ownership," read the decision.
In 1986, Delos Santos and the other petitioners filed a complaint with the Kalibo, Aklan Regional Trial Court, claiming they inherited the lots from the supposed original lot owner Mariano delos Santos, their common ascendant.
An amended complaint was filed on May 8, 1991.
Elizalde and his late wife Joan, the first set of intervenors before the trial court, claimed they had purchased the lots on June 18, 1974 from the heirs of Leonardo delos Santos, the rightful owner of the lots.
In dismissing the complaint, the court declared the Elizaldes the rightful owners of one-third of the land in question or 4,957 square meters on the southeast portion.
The court also ruled that the third intervenors, Jesus delos Santos and Rosita delos Santos-Flores are the lawful owners of two-thirds of the land or 9,915 square meters on the northwest portion.
The second set of intervenors, Gloria Martin, Domingo Casimero, Sergio Casimero, Abundio Casimero, and Teodoro Casimero, claimed ownership over two lots as heirs of one Tomasa Prado, who allegedly owned the lots.
The Aklan court dismissed the complaint in intervention of the Casimeros for lack of merit.
Delos Santos and the Elizaldes separately appealed the lower court’s ruling before the CA.
On Oct. 6, 1998, the Elizaldes, and Jesus de los Santos and Rosita de los Santos-Flores filed a joint manifestation expressing the Elizaldes’ intention to abandon their appeal following an amicable settlement between the parties on May 27, 1997.
They agreed to swap and re-adjust the areas adjudged by the trial court in their favor, without prejudice to a final judgment by the CA.
On May 11, the CA dismissed the appeal of Delos Santos and considered the Elizaldes’ appeal withdrawn.
On June 17, 1999, Delos Santos filed a motion for reconsideration of the May 11 decision and sought the reinstatement of their appeal.
The CA denied the MR for having been filed beyond the 15-day reglementary period.
"Parties should not leave the entire business of litigation solely to their counsels," read the decision.
"Basic diligence requires that parties themselves should closely monitor the developments in their cases. They should provide full support to their lawyers and even work hand in hand with them to ensure the diligent pursuit and effective prosecution of their cases.
Inevitably, their failure to do so could result in prejudicial consequences."
Following the CA’s denial of their MR, Delos Santos and his co-petitioners elevated the case to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court decision was written by Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr., Senior Associate Justice Leonardo Quisumbing second division chairman, and members Associate Justices Antonio Carpio, Conchita Carpio-Morales, and Dante Tinga concurred with the decision.