SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 240193. April 1, 2019.]
GEORGE BOLANTE, SR., SARIP A. MACABATO, WILFREDO L. MONTAYA, EDDIE CANDARIE, EDITHA BIBIT, AND FRANCISCO L. ACEVEDO, JR., petitioners, vs.ROGELIO REVALDO, ERNESTO GA, JULIETA MAGHANOY, AND THE REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MAGUINDANAO, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 01 April 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 240193 (George Bolante, Sr., Sarip A. Macabato, Wilfredo L. Montaya, Eddie Candarie, Editha Bibit, and Francisco L. Acevedo, Jr. v. Rogelio Revaldo, Ernesto Ga, Julieta Maghanoy, and the Register of Deeds of Maguindanao)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the January 19, 2018 Decision 2 and the May 31, 2018 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 07881-MIN for failure of petitioners George Bolante, Sr., Sarip A. Macabato, Wilfredo L. Montaya, Eddie Candarie, Editha Bibit, and Francisco L. Acevedo, Jr. (petitioners) to sufficiently show that the CA committed any reversible error in upholding the May 2, 2016 4 and October 18, 2016 5 Orders of the Regional Trial Court of Midsayap, Cotabato, Branch 24 (RTC) in Civil Case No. 12-012 denying petitioners' Notice of Appeal 6 for failure to pay the full amount of docket and other legal fees within the prescribed period, which is jurisdictional and mandatory.
Indeed, the Court has consistently held that payment of docket fees within the prescribed period is jurisdictional and necessary for the perfection of an appeal, and non-compliance therewith shall constitute sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition. 7 Likewise, while the Court has, in various cases, relaxed procedural rules in order to avoid grave injustice to any of the parties, 8 such a situation does not obtain in this case. As correctly ruled by the CA, petitioners' appeal is bereft of merit in view of their failure to present evidence to prove their allegation that respondent Rogelio Revaldo procured his title over the subject property through fraud or misrepresentation. 9 Consequently, for failure to perfect their appeal in accordance with the rules, the March 3, 2016 RTC Decision 10 in Civil Case No. 12-012 has attained finality.
SO ORDERED. (REYES, J., JR., J., on official leave.)"
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 10-24.
2.Id. at 25-32. Penned by Associate Justice Tita Marilyn Payoyo-Villordon with Associate Justices Oscar V. Badelles and Romulo V. Borja, concurring.
3.Id. at 33-34.
4. CA rollo, pp. 11-13. Signed by Presiding Judge Lily Lydia A. Laquindanum.
5.Id. at 14-17.
6. See Notice of Appeal dated April 12, 2016; id. at 37-38.
7.Tuatis v. Spouses Escol, 619 Phil. 465, 480 (2009).
8. See Philippine Savings Bank v. Papa, G.R. No. 200469, January 15, 2018.
9. See rollo, p. 30.
10. CA rollo, pp. 18-35.