FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 219418. August 24, 2015.]
CPM GROUP OF COMPANIES HOLDINGS CORPORATION AND TIERRACON REALTY CORPORATION, AS REPRESENTED BY CONSOLACION P. MARCOS, petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 24, CABANATUAN CITY, AND PRODUCERS SAVINGS BANK CORPORATION, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedAugust 24, 2015 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 219418 (CPM Group of Companies Holdings Corporation and Tierracon Realty Corporation, as represented by Consolacion P. Marcos v. Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Court, Branch 24, Cabanatuan City, and Producers Savings Bank Corporation). — The petitioners' manifestation and compliance, submitting a USB containing the petition for certiorari is NOTED.
After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolves to DISMISS outright the instant petition for being the wrong mode of appeal in assailing the May 28, 2015 Decision 1 and July 3, 2015 Resolution 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 139731.
Notably, petitioners CPM Group of Companies Holdings Corporation and Tierracon Realty Corporation, as represented by Consolacion P. Marcos, should have filed a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, which is the plain, speedy, and adequate remedy, and not a petition for certiorari, in assailing the findings of the CA. Fundamental is the rule that the extraordinary remedy of certiorari would not lie if there is a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. 3
SO ORDERED." DaIAcC
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, pp. 40-47. Penned by Associate Justice Isaias P. Dicdican with Associate Justices Victoria Isabel A. Paredes and Melchor Quirino C. Sadang concurring.
2. Id. at 26-27.
3. See Republic v. Yang Chi Hao, 617 Phil. 422, 432 (2009).