DR. SISENANDO E. PORIO & DELIA Y. PORIO, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, VS. UNITED OVERSEAS BANK PHILIPPINES, SUBSTITUTED BY ONSHORE STRATEGIC ASSETS (SPV-AMC), INC. DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
BORJA, J.:
Agreement and to Render Judgment based on Compromise Agreement” dated
December 4, 2013, filed by the plaintiffs-appellants who manifest to
this Court that, the parties having resolved their differences, they
have entered into a compromise agreement to end their litigation. Hence,
plaintiffs-appellants prayed that judgment in this appeal be rendered
based on the compromise. Attached to the said motion is Annex “A”,
denominated as “Compromise Agreement”, which embodies the agreement of
the parties.
The Court, however, finds the above motion misleading.
While the above pleading is captioned as a “Joint Motion”, which
supposes that the same was filed by both parties (plaintiffs and
defendant), only the plaintiffs filed the said motion. As shown from the
Affidavit of Service attached to the “Joint Motion”, the defendant thru
Atty. Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa was merely furnished a copy of the
motion. Consequently, this indicates that the defendant had no
participation in the filing of the motion. Despite attaching the
parties’ “Compromise Agreement” to the motion, the Court is not under
any duty to construe whether the filing of the above motion was with the
conformity of the defendant.
Thus, before acting on the above
motion, the defendant is directed to manifest within five (5) days from
notice its conformity to have this case resolved in accordance with the
compromise agreement supposedly entered into by the parties.
SO ORDERED.
Badelles and Contreras,[*] JJ., concur.
[*] vice J. Maria Filomena D. Singh, who is on leave, per raffle dated April 1, 2014.