Augusto S. Padilla, et al. vs. Manila Polo Club, Inc., et al.

[SEC CASE NO. 3138. October 15, 1987.] AUGUSTO A. PADILLA, ET AL. , petitioners , vs . MANILA POLO CLUB, INC., ET AL. , respondents . O R D E R This is a resolution on the petitioners' motion for reconsideration of the Order dated August 14, 1987, dismissing the petition for lack of jurisdiction over the claim for damages of the petitioners. In support of the motion for reconsideration, movants invoked the ruling of the Supreme Court in Philex Mining Corporation vs. Reyes, G.R. No. L-57707, November 19, 1982, (118 SCRA 602). In said case, the real issue is whether or not a corporation is bound to replace a stockholders' lost certificate of stock, which is clearly an intra-corporate controversy and therefore within the jurisdiction of this Commission. While it is true that in the ruling of the Supreme Court in said case, there was a statement that "the question of damages raised is merely incidental to that main issue", said statement is a mere obiter and the question of damages was not squarely ruled upon. AHDcCT In the absence of a ruling superior to the case of Onapal Philippine Commodities, Inc. vs. Hon. Priscila S. Agana, where the Intermediate Appellate Court categorically ruled that this Commission does not have jurisdiction to award damages, said ruling must, in the meantime, prevail. cETDIA WHEREFORE, the petitioners' motion for reconsideration should be, as it is hereby DENIED. SO ORDERED. (SGD.) FELIPE S. TONGCO Hearing Officer