FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 247688. June 3, 2019.][Formerly UDK 16407]
WINSTON A. SUJIAN, petitioner, vs.COURT OF APPEALS, BEATRIZ G. TORNO, ATTY. RITCHEL CATANI, PAGDAWAN S. FONACIER, ET AL., respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedJune 3, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 247688 [Formerly UDK 16407] (Winston A. Sujian v. Court of Appeals, Beatriz G. Torno, Atty. Ritchel Catani, Pagdawan S. Fonacier, et al.). — The Court resolves to DISMISS the petition and AFFIRM the September 21, 2018 and January 23, 2019 Resolutions of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP UDK No. 08939-MIN for failure of petitioner to show that the CA committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in dismissing his petition outright because of its numerous defects.
As correctly held by the CA, Section 3, Rule 46 of the Rules of Court states that the failure of a petitioner to comply with any of the requirements stated therein shall be a sufficient ground for the dismissal of the petition. Even in his motion for reconsideration before the CA, petitioner did not attempt to comply with the requirements for filing a petition for certiorari. While litigation is not a game of technicalities, it does not mean that the Rules of Court may be ignored at will and at random to the prejudice of the orderly presentation and assessment of the issues and the just resolution of the case.
The instant petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with motion to plead as indigent is RE-DOCKETED as a regular case.
SO ORDERED."Carandang, J., on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court