BANG KO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS (BSP) vs. FELICIANO LEGASPI G.R. No. 205966
March 2, 206
Fac!"# BSP fled a Complaint or annulment o title, revocation o certifcate and damages (with application or TROwrit o preliminar! preliminar! in"unction# against Secretar! Secretar! $ose %. &tien'a, &tien'a, $r., $r., %uningning . )e %eon, *ngr. Ramon C. &ngelo, $r., $r., *+-a!or -atilde &. %egaspi and respondent respondent eliciano eliciano P. P. %egaspi /eore the RTC, RTC issued issued prelimi preliminar! nar! in"uncti in"unction, on, en"oinin en"oining g deendan deendants ts *ngr. *ngr. Ramon Ramon C. &ngelo, &ngelo, $r. $r. and petitioner petitioner eliciano eliciano P. P. %egaspi, %egaspi, and persons persons acting acting or and in their /ehal, /ehal, rom rom pursuing pursuing the construct construction, ion, development andor operation o a dumpsite or landfll in Baranga! San -ateo, 0or'agara!, 0or'agara!, Bulacan, in an area allegedl! covered /! OCT 0o. P121ree Patent 0o. 324564. Respondent %egaspi then fled a motion to dismiss alleging that the RTC RTC did not ac7uire ac7uire "urisdiction over the person person o the petitioner BSP. RTC denied. On %egaspi8s -R, %egaspi argued that the RTC ailed to ac7uire "urisdiction over the action /ecause the complaint, a real action, ailed to allege the assessed value o the su/"ect propert!. propert!. RTC denied /ecause /ecause since since the su/"ect propert! propert! contains contains an area area o 191,49: 191,49: s7uare s7uare meters, meters, it is unthin;a/le that said propert! would have an assessed value o less than P3<,<<<.<< which is within the "urisdiction o the -unicipal -unicipal Trial Trial Courts and that a ta+ declaration showing showing the assessed value o P31,291,5<<.<< and latest 'onal value o P6=2,6:3,<1<.<< was attached to the complaint. >owever, on appeal C& granted , %egaspi8s %egaspi8s petition. >ence, BSP BSP see; to set aside the C&8s decision. I""$%# ?O0 the RTC properl properl! ! ta;e ta;e "udicial "udicial notice o the su/"ect propert!8s propert!8s value, hence it has e+clusive e+clusive original "urisdiction "urisdiction over the su/"ect matter o Civil Case 0o. 3<5-3<<1. &%'# @es. @es. Ander Batas Pam/ansa Bilang 635, as amended /! Repu/lic &ct 0o. 4:56, the RTC has e+clusive original "urisdiction over civil actions which involve title to possession o real propert!, or an! interest there therein, in, wher where e the asses assesse sed d value value o the prope propert! rt! involv involved ed e+cee e+ceeds ds Twent! went! Thousa Thousand nd Pesos esos (P3<,<<<.<<#. The noninclusion on the ace o the complaint o the amount o the propert!, however, is not atal /ecause attached in the complaint is a ta+ declaration (&nne+ 0 in the complaint# o the propert! in 7uestion showing that it has an assessed value o P362,93<.<<. t must /e emphasi'ed that anne+es to a complaint are deemed part o, and should /e considered together with the complaint. n luor )aniel, nc.Philippines v. v. *.B. Dillarosa Dillarosa and Partners Partners Co., %td., the Court ruled that in determining the suEcienc! o a cause o action, the courts should also consider the attachments to the complaint. >ence, /eing an anne+ to BSPFs complaint, the ta+ declaration showing the assessed value o the propert! is deemed a part o the complaint and should /e considered together with it in determining that the RTC has e+clusive original "urisdiction. RTC committed no error in ta;ing "udicial notice o the assesse assessed d value value o the su/"ect propert! propert!.. A co$r! *'' !a+% $*c*a' -o!*c% o *!" o- ac!" a- r%cor" *- !h% "a/% ca"%, o ac!" %"!a'*"h% *- 1r*or 1roc%%*-" *- !h% "a/% ca"%, o !h% a$!h%-!*c*!3 o *!" o- r%cor" o a-o!h%r ca"% %!%%- !h% "a/% 1ar!*%", o !h% 4'%" o r%'a!% ca"%" *- !h% "a/% co$r!, a- o 1$'*c r%cor" o- 4'% *- !h% "a/% co$r! . Since a cop! o the ta+ declaration, which is a pu/lic record, was attached to the complaint, the same document is alread! considered as on fle with the court, thus, the court can now ta;e "udicial notice o such. considering that the area o the su/"ect land is our million eight hundred thirt!eight thousand seven hundred and thirt!si+ (=,191,49:# s7uare meters, the RTC acted properl! when it too; "udicial notice o the total area o the propert! involved and the prevailing assessed value o the titled propert!, and it would also /e at the height o a/surdit! i the assessed value o the propert! with such an area is less than P3<,<<<.<<. Petition R&0T*).
