Pilando v. Rural Bank of Rizal (K.A.), Inc.

March 25, 2010 SEC CASE NO. 07-09-275 IN THE MATTER OF ARNULFO S. PILANDO, CHRISTINE B. WANGDALI and ANTONIO ALVAREZ , petitioners , vs . RURAL BANK OF RIZAL (K.A.), INC. , respondent . FOR : Indirect Contempt ORDER For resolution is the Motion for Reconsideration dated 25 February 2010 filed by the counsel for Rural Bank of Rizal (K.A.), Inc., Nerissa Orodio, Marietta Jambaro, Efraim Orodio, Benjamin De Sesto and Samuel Garcia praying that the Order dated 4 February 2010 of the Commission En Banc be reconsidered, set aside and vacated, and further prays that a new order be issued denying the petition for contempt filed by the petitioners. The 2006 Rules of Procedure of the Commission ("SEC"), Rule III, Section 3-6, provides: "Sec. 3-6. Prohibited Pleadings. The following pleadings or any submission that is filed or made under a similar guise or title shall not be allowed: xxx xxx xxx c) Motion for New Trial, Reconsideration of Judgment or Order, or Reopening of Trial; . . ." (Emphasis supplied) Under the SEC Rules, a motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading. The proper recourse of an aggrieved party from an adverse decision of the Commission En Banc is to file the necessary action before the Court of Appeals within the time prescribed under the 1997 Rules of Court. WHEREFORE, the Motion for Reconsideration dated 25 February 2010 is hereby DENIED. SO ORDERED. CSAaDE Mandaluyong City, March 25, 2010. (SGD.) FE B. BARIN Chairperson (SGD.) MA. JUANITA E. CUETO Commissioner (SGD.) RAUL J. PALABRICA Commissioner (SGD.) MANUEL HUBERTO B. GAITE Commissioner (SGD.) ELADIO M. JALA Commissioner