SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 175396. September 12, 2012.]
FIL-ESTATE PROPERTIES, INC., petitioner, v. LINA ANG AURELIO, INC., respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 12 September 2012which reads as follows:
G.R. No. 175396 (Fil-Estate Properties, Inc. v. Lina Ang Aurelio, Inc.).
After a careful perusal of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in finding that petitioner's failure to file its appeal memorandum, as required by the Office of the President (OP), is fatal to its appeal.
We discern in the proceedings in this case a pattern of conduct that reveals a propensity on the part of petitioner to disregard the rules and lawful orders of the courts, which We cannot countenance. It should be stressed that the invocation of "the interest of substantial justice" is not a magic wand that will automatically compel this Court to suspend procedural rules. Like all rules, they are required to be followed except only for the most persuasive of reasons when they may be relaxed to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of its thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed. 1 As aptly pointed out by the appellate court, the resignation of one of the lawyers in the law firm handling petitioner's case allegedly resulting to confusion and failure to comply with the Order of the OP is not such persuasive reason that could warrant a relaxation of the rules.
WHEREFORE, the assailed May 19, 2006 Decision and November 7, 2006 Resolution of the CA are hereby AFFIRMED. IDcTEA
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Lim v. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 172574, 594 SCRA 607, 618, citing Lazaro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 137761, April 6, 2000, 330 SCRA 208.