335 Phil. 773
HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.:
. “Complaint in A.M. No. RTJ-95-1312 | Instant complaint. |
---|---|
‘2. That Respondents Atty. JESUS AGANA has his law office at R &T Building, Taal-Capistrano Sts., Cagayan de Oro City; Atty. Erasto Salcedo, no a Judge, has his office in the Regional Trial Court, Br. 31, Tagum, Davao del Norte, where summons and processes of the Court may be served; | ‘2. Respondent, Atty. Jesus Agana has his law office at R&T Building, Taal-Capistrano Sts., Cagayan de Oro City; Atty. Erasto Salcedo Hon. Judge has his office in the Regional Trial Court, Br. 31, Tagum, Davao del Norte, where summons and processes of the Commission may be served; |
‘3. That complaint is the President of the Landless Farmers Tribal Development, Inc., a duly organized and registered non-stock corporation under the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, whose members are farmers of the national cultural minorities, who have occupied and cultivated a public land, Lot 3047 covering an area of two hundred (200) hectares, more or less, since early 1950s, pursuant to Section 44 of the Public Land Act; | ‘3. Complaint is counsel for Helen Balani, President of the Landless Farmers Tribal Development, Inc., a duly organized and registered non-stock corporation under the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, whose members and farmers of the national cultural minorities, who have occupied, cultivated and planted a public land, Lot 3047, covering an area of 200 hundred hectares, more or less, since early 1950s, pursuant to Section 44 of the Public Land ACT; |
‘4. That on July 22, 1981, a certain TIMOTEO QUIMPO without the knowledge of the occupants in Lot 3047, secured the decree of registration on same, for which OCT No. 0-792 was issued and registered with the Register of Deeds, Cagayan de Oro City, copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘A;’ | ‘4. On July 22, 1981, a certain TIMOTEO QUIMPO, without the knowledge of the occupants on said public land, Lot 3047, secured the decree of registration on same, for which the Register of Deeds, Cagayan de Oro City, issued OCT No. 0-792, copy of which is attached, hereto as ANNEX ‘A’ on its application for Registration of Title is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘B;’ |
‘5. That on May 11, 1982, respondent Atty. Erasto Salcedo, as counsel for occupants in Lot 3047, seasonably caused the annotation of the notice of lis pendens, Petition for Review on the decree of registration of OCT No. 0-792, pursuant to Section 332, PD 1529, which appear encircled on ANNEX ‘A’ as ANNEX ‘A-1,’ | ‘5. On May 11, 1982, Helen Balani, head and leader of the cultural minority farmers, hired Atty. Erasto Salcedo to cause the annotation of the notice of lis pendens, Entry No. 98909, Petition for Review on the decree of registration of OCT No. 0-792, pursuant to Sec. 32, PD 1529, which appear encircled as ANNEX ‘A-1;’ |
‘6. That pursuant to an alleged Barter-Agreement Xavier University, Inc. and TIMOTEO QUIMPO, TCT No. T-51944 was issued by the Register of Deeds, Cagayan de Oro City on March 25, 1988, copy of which is ‘B,’ and the lis pendens carried over, appear on ANNEX ‘B’ as ANNEX ‘b-1;’ | ‘6. Despite the ‘notice of lis pendens’ Xavier University, Inc. acquired the property, Lot 3047, from Timoteo Quimpo, for which on March 25, 1988 TCT NO. T-51944 and TCT No. T-51945 was issued by the Register of Deeds, Cagayan de Oro City, copy of TCT No. T-51944 is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘C; |
‘7. That respondent Atty. Erasto Salcedo was discharged as counsel for occupants in Lot 3047, by HELEN BALANI (Complainant) on February 27, 1992; | ‘7. On February 27, 1992, Helen Balani, et al., discontented and suspicious of Atty. Erasto Salcedo, filed with the Court of Appeals a Motion to Discharge him, which the Court of Appeals granted pursuant to Resolution dated 18 March 1992, copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘D |
‘8. That on April 27, 1992, Xavier University, Agana filed in Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, Cagayan de Oro City, a Petition for Cancellation of Notice of Lis Pendens annotated on TCT No. T-51944, supported by a ‘PETITION’ executed by praying that said annotation on OCT No. 0-792 and subsequent TCT No. 51944 and TCT No. 51945 be cancelled, copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘C;’ | ‘8. On April 27, 1992, Atty. Jesus Agana, as counsel for Xavier University, Inc., filed in Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, Cagayan Oro City, a PETITION for cancellation of the notice of lis pendens annotated on Xavier University, Inc. TCT No. T-51944 and TCT No. 51945, supported by a PETITION, executed by Atty. Erasto Salcedo without the knowledge of Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al. and not verified by them who cause(d) the annotation of the notice of lis pendens on May 11, 1982. Copy of PETITION for cancellation is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘E,’ unverified PETITION executed by Atty. Salcedo, as ANNEX ‘F |
‘9. That as a result, on the strength of said ‘PETITION,’ Regional Trial Court, Br. 23 issued Order dated June 11, 1992, copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘D,’ quoted hereunder: | ‘9. On the strength of the unverified ‘PETITION,’ it is strange that the Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, granted the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens, EX-PARTE, manifest in the Order dated June 11, 1992, copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX 'G;’ |
‘x x x Hence, the entry of notice of lis pendens on OCT No. 0-792, under Entry No. 98909, which was carried over to Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-51944 and T-51945, with latter titles being the products from the old title, Original Certificate of Title No. 0-792, the same are hereby ordered cancelled. x x x’ | |
[Note: This could not be re-alleged as said Petition for Certiorari was dismissed on August 14, 1994. A motion for reconsideration of said decision dismissing the petition was denied on February 24, 1995 as it was filed 33 days late. (Footnote No. 3, page 2, OCA Memorandum, Rollo, A.M. No. RTJ-95-13120] | |
’10. That on August 28, 1992, Complainants through counsel filed a Petition for Certiorari, docketed (as) CA-G.R. SP No. 28776, which presently is still pending resolution with the COURT OF APPEALS, Ninth Division; | ’10. Based on the foregoing paragraphs 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9, Complainant charges:- |
‘Atty. Jesus Agana and Atty. Erasto Salcedo connived, schemed and collaborated to engage in dishonest and deceitful conduct, did not observe the rules of procedure and misuse them to defeat the ends of justice, for corrupt motive or interest encourage the suit or proceeding, in violation of Rule 1.01, Rule 1.03, Rule 10.01, Rule 10.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and their oath of office as attorney and member of the BAR, committed under the following facts and circumstances: | |
’11. That under the foregoing paragraphs 5 and 8, Complainant charges Atty. Jesus Agana and Atty. Erasto Salcedo of wanton falsehood, (and that they) connived, schemed and confederated to secure by deceitful means the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens on OCT 0-792, TCT No. T-51944 and TCT No. 51945, in absolute violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 1.01, Rule 1.03, Rule 10.01, Rule 10.03, Rule 10.01, Rule 10.03, and their Oath of Office as attorney and member of the Bar, under the following facts and circumstances: | ‘ |
11a. That Atty. Agana filed the Petition for Cancellation of Notice of Lis Pendens, fully aware that Xavier University, Inc. has absolutely no legal capacity to sue, knowing fully well the applicable Sec. 24 of Rule 14 and Sec. 77 of PD 1529, on the matter of cancellation of lis pendens, to wit: [sections copied verbatim]
’10a. That Atty. Jesus Agana filed the Petition for cancellation of Notice of lis pendens, fully aware the Xavier University, Inc. has no legal capacity to sue, knowing the well-known Sec. 24 of Rule 14 of the Rules of Court, and Sec. 77 of PD 1529, on the matter of cancellation of notice of lis pendens: [sections copied verbatim]
’111. (first part) That Atty. Erasto Salcedo deceived and mislead the Court that the Petition was in conformity with Sec. 24, Rule 14 and Sec. 77, PD 1529; knowingly did not observed and (did) misuse the rules x x x
‘11b. That Atty. Jesus Agana knew that the adverse party contemplated in said Sec. 24 and Sec. 77 is TIMOTEO QUIMPO, who has the legal capacity to sue and file the Petition for Cancellation of Lis Pendens;
‘10b. Atty. Agana knew that the adverse party contemplated in Sec. 24 and Sec. 77 is TIMOTEO QUIMPO, who has he legal capacity to use (sic) and file the Petition for Cancellation of the notice of lis pendens annotated on its OCT 0-792;
‘11c. That Atty. Jesus Agana knew that Xavier University, Inc. who acquired the property aware of the notice of lis pendens annotated on OCT No. 0-792, subjects its acquisition to the outcome of the lis pendens;
‘10c. Atty. Jesus Agana knew the well-known jurisprudence, that Xavier University, Inc., who acquired the property aware of the notice of lis pendens annotated on OCT No. 0-792, a mere purchaser pendente lite, subjects its acquisition to the eventuality of the Petition for Review (lis pendens), Xavier University, Inc. is not only estoppel to file the petition but also has no legal capacity to file the PETITION;
‘11D. That Atty. Jesus Agana served copy of the Petition for Cancellation on Atty. Erasto Salcedo, who, he very well knew was no longer counsel for Abundio Caballero, et al., occupants of Lot 3047, having been discharged by Complainant, the leader and president of the Association;
‘10d. Atty. Jesus Agana served copy of the petition foe cancellation on Atty. Erasto Salcedo, who he very well knew was no longer counsel for Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al, based on the Motion to Discharge filed with the Court of Appeals and granted pursuant to Resolution, copy which is attached hereto as ANNEX ‘D;’
‘11e. That Atty. Jesus Agana Jesus Agana knew that the undersigned substituted Atty. Erasto Salcedo;
‘10e. Atty. Jesus Agana knew that Complainant substituted Atty. Erasto Salcedo as counsel for Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al. (Pls. See ANNEX ‘E’) Regional Trial Court, Br. 23;
‘11f. That Atty. Jesus Agana, knowing fully well that the lis pendens was a trial in Regional Trial court, Br. 18, filed surreptitiously the Petition for Cancellation in Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, which he knew has no jurisdiction over the case;
‘10f. Atty. Agana knew fully well that the petition for review (lis pendens) was on trial in Regional Trial Court, Br. 18, yet surreptitiously filed the Petition in Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, which he knew has no jurisdiction over the case, in violation of Sec. 108 PD 1529, i.e., the petition should be filed in the original case in which the decree of the registration was entered;
‘11g. That Atty. Jesus Agana, with corrupt motive, deceitfully saw to it that the undersigned was not furnished with copy of the Petition for Cancellation;
‘10g. Atty. Jesus Agana and Atty. Erasto Salcedo with corrupt motive connived, schemed and collaborated to see to it that the herein Complainant would not be served copy of this PETITION (ANNEX ‘E’);
‘11h. That Atty. Jesus Agana and Atty. Erasto Salcedo deceived and mislead the Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, to issue Order, ANNEX ‘D,’ on the strength of the unverified PETITION;
‘10h. Atty. Jesus Agana and Atty Erasto Salcedo deceived and mislead the Regional Trial Court, Br. 23, to issue Order (ANNEX ‘G’), on the strength of the null and void unverified PETITION (ANNEX ‘F’);
‘11i. That Atty. Erasto Salcedo’s knowing fully well that he was already discharged by Complainant on February 27, 1992 and no longer counsel for Abundio Caballero et al., executed the PETITION, ANNEX ‘D’ on June 1, 1992
‘10j. Atty. Erasto Salcedo, by executing the PETITION (ANNEX ‘G’) misrepresented that he was the counsel for Helen Balani, et al., knowing fully well that he was already discharged as counsel;
‘11j. That Atty. Erasto Salcedo’s allegation in the said PETITION is wanton falsehood, without factual and legal basis, knowing for a fact that, the lis pendens, he caused to be registered on May 11, 1982 was on trial in Regional Trial Court, Br. 18.
‘10i. The allegations in the PETITION is (sic) wanton falsehood, knowing for a fact that the Petition of Review Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al. caused to be registered in May 11, 1982 was on trial in Regional Trial Court, Br. 18, which copy of pleadings and order are attached hereto as ANNEXES ‘H,’ ‘H-1,’ ‘H-2,’ (and_ ‘G-3’ (sic);
‘11k. That Atty. Erasto Salcedo in executing the PETITION misrepresented that he was still the counsel for Abundio Caballero, et al.;
101. Atty. Erasto Salcedo discharged by Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al. in retaliation, connived, schemed and confederated with Atty. Jesus Agana that he execute the PETITION (ANNEX ‘F’) unverified by Helen Balani, et al. and submit the same to him (Atty. Agana ) as supporting document to his PETITION (ANNEX ‘E’)- when in good fidelity and loyalty to his former clients he should have refrained;
111. (second part) That Atty. Erasto Salcedo x x x submitt(ed) the Petition unverified by Abundio Caballero, et al., the party who caused the lis pendens to be registered;
‘10k. (first part) x x x Atty. Erasto Salcedo, as counsel for Helen Balani, Abundio Caballero, et al. (who0 seasonably cause(d) the annotation of the notice of lis pendens x x x
‘11m. That Atty. Salcedo’s Petition, in its entirety, is a wanton falsehood, deceitful and mislead the Court to admit it as its key evidence in issuing the Order, ANNEX ‘E,’ to cancel the notice of lis pendens;
‘10m. It is underscored, the Order (ANNEX ‘G’) granting the cancellation, was anchored on Atty. E. Salcedo’s null and void petition ANNEX ‘F;’
‘10k. (second part0 On may 11, 1992, Atty. Erasto Salcedo x x x for corrupt motive delayed and forestalled its prosecution for the duration of ten (10) years, and, instead on June 1, 1992 executed the PETITION for its cancellation.”