You're currently signed in as:
User

PEDRO CASTANEDA v. SANDIGANDAYAN

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2010-09-29
PEREZ, J.
The delineation of the jurisdiction of the regular courts and the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) over cases between a subdivision owner and buyer is primarily at issue in this petition for review-on certiorari filed pursuant to Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, assailing the 12 April 2002 Decision rendered by the Special Seventh Division of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 91771.[1]
2010-09-29
PEREZ, J.
Elevated by respondents on appeal before Branch 37 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Calamba, Laguna, the foregoing decision was affirmed in toto in the 23 May 2000 decision rendered by said court in Civil Case No. 2866-99-C. Undeterred by the denial of their motion for reconsideration of said decision in the RTC's order dated 21 September 2000,[20] respondents filed the petition for review which was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 61243 before the CA which, thru its then Special Twelfth Division, granted their application for a writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin the enforcement of said 23 May 2000 decision.[21] On 12 April 2002, the then Special Seventh Division of the CA rendered the herein assailed decision, reversing the decisions of the MTC and RTC and ordering the dismissal of petitioners' complaint for unlawful detainer[22] upon the following findings and conclusions: The action is not a simple case for unlawful detainer.  The complaint focuses on [respondents'] refusal to execute the Contract to Sell and to pay the monthly installments for Lot 23 in Lophcal Subdivision.