This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2016-02-10 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Verily, it is a settled rule that a court cannot grant a relief not prayed for in the pleadings or in excess of that being sought. In Bucal v. Bucal,[36] the Court, reiterating the ruling in DBP v. Teston, explained:Due process considerations justify this requirement. It is improper to enter an order which exceeds the scope of relief sought by the pleadings, absent notice which affords the opposing party an opportunity to be heard with respect to the proposed relief. The fundamental purpose of the requirement that allegations of a complaint must provide the measure of recovery is to prevent surprise to the defendant. (Emphasis supplied.) | |||||