PEDRO L. FLORES, PETITIONER, VS. PERFECTO R. PALACIO, JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CAMARINES SUR, EXCEQUIELA RABAJANTE AND JUAN A. PARCO, RESPONDENTS.

Excequiela Rabajante, married to Juan A. Parco, is the lessee
of a public residential land in Naga, Camarines Sur, in a lease contract
executed in her facor by the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources,
subject to the provisions of Public Land Act No. 141. Her husband Parco was
transferred sometime in 1939 to Legaspi, Albay, then to Catanduanes, as interim
provincial treasurer and later on to Santa Cruz, Laguna, as assistant provincial
treasurer. The house Excequiela built in the land was burned to the ground in
1942.

With the permission of the mayor of Naga, Pedro L. Flores
constructed a building on the lot in question and filed with the Bureau of Lands
a protest against the continuance of the lease contract in favor of Excequiela.
Pending determination of said protest, Excequiela and her husband filed with the
Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur an action for ejectment against Flores.
Having no defense in said civil case, as the contract of lease is still in force
and not otherwise cancelled, Flores entered into an agreement with the
plaintiffs promising ot vacate teh land wihtin three months from and after the
signing of said agreement, Flores hoping that within said period his calim to
the lot in question would have been already determined definitely and finally by
the Department of Agriculture and Commerce. Accordingly, decision was rendered
and on December 11, 1947, a writ of execution was issued for the ouster of
Flores from the lot in question.

Flores seeks the annulment of the agreement he entered into to
vacate the lot and of the writ of execution of December 11, 1947, alleging that
on October 4, 1947, he instituted with the Court of First Instance of Camarines
Sur an action for mandamus to compel the Secretary of Agriculture and Commerce
to terminate the lease contract in favor of Excequiela and that the respondent
judge acted without or in excess of his jurisdiction in not permitting Flores to
continue in the possession of the lot in question until after the mandamus
proceedings shall have been finally terminated.

The petition is without merit. If, as petitioner claims, the
agreement to vacate the lot in question was entered into by him against his
will, he should have availed himself of the remedy provided to by Rule 38 to
annul the same instead of restoring to the present petition for certiorari and
prohibition.

As regards the mandamus case against the Secretary of
Agriculture and Commerce initiated on October 4, 1947, with the Court of First
Instance of Camarines Sur, it cannot in any way divest the respondent judge of
his power and jurisdiction to issue or order the issuance of the writ of
execution of December 11, 1947, which is based on a final decision rendered on
the basis of an agreement entered into by the parties. Regardless of any merit
the mandamus case may have, its result is speculative. A final decision of a
court of justice cannot be suspended or annulled upon a speculation.

Petition denied with costs against petitioner.

Moran, C. J., Ozaeta, Paras, Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason,
Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ., concur.