SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 254945. March 1, 2021.]
MANUEL BABASA, MIGUEL VASQUEZ, AND SHIRLEY CAMPOSANO VASQUEZ, petitioners,vs. ANATALIA C. REAL, MICHAEL C. REAL, RAFAELITO C. REAL, SAMUEL C. REAL, AND JOSEPH DENNIS C. REAL,*AS HEIRS OF IGNACIO C. REAL, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 01 March 2021which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 254945 (Manuel Babasa, Miguel Vasquez, and Shirley Camposano Vasquez v. Anatalia C. Real, Michael C. Real, Rafaelito C. Real, Samuel C. Real, and Joseph Dennis C. Real, as Heirs of Ignacio C. Real). — After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the Resolutions dated January 21, 2020 2 and December 10, 2020 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 162978 for failure of petitioners Manuel Babasa, Miguel Vasquez, and Shirley Camposano Vasquez (petitioners) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in dismissing their petition for review due to procedural deficiencies. HTcADC
As aptly observed by the CA, petitioners failed to provide any explanation for their non-compliance with the rules. 4 To be sure, the relaxation of procedural rules cannot be made without any valid reasons proffered for or underpinning it. To merit liberality, petitioners must show reasonable cause justifying their non-compliance with the rules and must convince the Court that the outright dismissal of the petition would defeat the administration of substantive justice, 5 which petitioners failed to do. The relaxation of procedural rules in the interest of justice was never intended to be a license for erring litigants to violate the rules with impunity. 6 Petitioners urge a less rigid application of procedural rules to give way to the resolution of the case on its merits. However, the desired leniency cannot be accorded absent valid and compelling reasons for such a procedural lapse, 7 as in this case.
SO ORDERED. (Rosario, J., on leave.)"
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
* 'Joseph S. Real' in the title of the petition. Rollo, p. 16.
1. See Petition for Review on Certiorari dated February 18, 2021; id. at 16-32.
2.Id. at 34-36. Penned by Associate Justice Ruben Reynaldo G. Roxas with Associate Justices Celia C. Librea-Leagogo and Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr., concurring.
3.Id. at 56-58.
4.Id. at 57.
5. See Unsigned Resolution in Rumohr v. Sani, G.R. No. 242131, January 7, 2019, citing Daikoku Electronics Phils., Inc. v. Raza, 606 Phil. 796, 803 (2009).
6. See Unsigned Resolution in Tabique v. Rural Transit [Mindanao], Inc., G.R. No. 215984, July 30, 2019.
7. See Daikoku Electronics Phils., Inc. v. Raza, supra.