The plaintiff has appealed to this Court from the decision of the Court  of First  Instance  of  Rizal  dismissing his complaint for support on the ground that hid own evidence failed to establish his right thereto, inasmuch as he did not show he was one of the children entitled to support from their  parents namely,  (1) legitimate children;  (2) acknowledged natural children;  (3)  natural  children  by legal fictions; (4) illegitimate children who are not natural.

In his  notice of  appeal, plaintiff announced the intention to bring the matter to  this Court to  raise questions of law only.  And in the printed brief filed here, he contended that under the facts found by the trial judge, he was entitled  to  support, as  an illegitimate  child  who is  not natural.   The  defendant meets the points  raised; and  in addition  discusses  the  vital  question  of  paternity.   He claims, and quotes from the testimonial evidence, that plaintiff ; is not his son, or has failed to establish filiation.

This appeal  involves, therefore, issues of fact, and does not belong here, the amount in controversy being less than P50.000

"*  *  * when a  case is  appealed  directly to the Supreme  Court for the reason that appellant is raising only a question of law, but appellee in his brief raises questions of fact disputing the findings of the  trial Court, the appeal should be referred to the Court of Appeals.  An appellee who obtains a favorable  judgment is  not called upon to appeal and attack a decision that favors him; neither is he in a position to  decide which Court he wants the appeal of the appellant  to  go  to, until the (appellee)  has read the brief of said  appellant and, appraised himself of  the  issues  raised,  the arguments addressed, and the chances of having the appealed decision  reversed or modified on those issues  and arguments  alone. Consequently,  after reading the appellant's brief, appellee may raise issues of fact in his brief to maintain the judgment on other grounds without the necessity, in such case, of  appealing.  And if appellee, under such circumstances, does raise questions of fact in his brief, it is proper to certify the whole  case to the  Court  of Appeals." (Moran, Rules of Court  [1957  Ed.] Vol.  I, p. 674  citing  Justo, et al.  vs.  Hernando, 89 Phil., 268; Saenz vs. Mitchell, 60  Phil., 60, 80; Villovert  vs. Lim,  62 Phil., 178 etc.;  Relativo vs Castro, 76 Phil.,  563.)

Accordingly, the record  should  be referred, as  it  is hereby referred, to the Court of Appeals for adjudication.

Paras,  C. J.,  Padilla,  Montemayor,  Bautista Angela, Labrador, Concepcion,  Endencia, and Barrera, JJ., concur.