CRIM PRO

| B2015
CASES

NAGUIAT v. IAC
August 18, 1988
Padilla, J.
Dave Anastacio

addition, he filed a case for specific performances and damages

to compel TSDC and Lazatin to deliver the lands to him.

ISSUES: WON consolidation of the two cases is proper in

this case- YES
SUMMARY: There was a dispute as to whether or not full amount of price for 4 plots of land has been paid by vendee. Vendee filed a
civil complaint for specific performance and damges fo vendor to deliver ownership of lands. A criminal complaint for violation of PD
RATIO: Petitioner invokes Rule 111, Sec. 3(a), Rules of Court,
957 against vendor was also filed. Court ruled that these cases could be consolidated.
which provides:
DOCTRINE: Civil actions not arising from ex delicto may still be consolidated with criminal actions, in accordance with
"Sec.
Other
actions
arising from
offenses.
Whenever
31 of the Rules of Court. They may be tried together when they arise from
the 3.
same
act,civil
event
or transaction,
involve
the same
or like
thethat
offended
party
have instituted
the to
civil
issues, and depend largely or substantially on the same evidence, provided
the court
has shall
jurisdiction
over the cases
be action to
enforce
the civil
arising
offense,
consolidated and that a joint trial will not give one party an undue advantage
or prejudice
theliability
substantial
rightsfrom
of anythe
of the
parties. as
contemplated in the first paragraph of Section 1 hereof, the
following rules shall be observed:
ACCUSED: Manuel Lazatin, President of TSDC
(a) 'After a criminal action has been commenced, the pending
COMPLAINANT: Antolin Naguiat
civil action arising from the same offense shall be suspended,
in whatever stage it may be found until final judgment in the
CRIME COMMITED: Violation of PD 957, failure to deliver lot
criminal proceeding has been rendered. However, if no final
upon full payment by vendee
judgment has been rendered by the trial court in the civil
action, the same may be consolidated with the criminal action
INFORMATION/COMPLAINT FILED BY: Naguiat
upon application with the court trying the criminal action. If
INFORMATION/COMPLAINANT FILED IN: civil suit-RTC of
the application is granted, the evidence presented and
Angeles, criminal suit-City Fiscal of Angeles
admitted in the civil action shall be deemed automatically
reproduced in the criminal action, without prejudice to the
PROCEDURAL PROBLEM RELATED TO THE SYLLABUS:
admission of additional evidence that any party may wish to
When consolidation of civil actions with criminal actions is proper
present.
FACTS: Naguiat bought 4 lots from Timog Silangan
This rule governs where the action is one for recovery of civil
Development Corporation. He paid in installments, and after
paying P60.00 per sq. meter for the total area of the lands, he
liability liablitiy that arises out of the criminal act, or ex delicto.
seeks the transfer of ownership by TSDC. TSDC alleges that the
In this case, his civil action is for specific performance and
real agreement was for Naguiat to pay P60.00, considering a
damages (for TSDC to deliver the titles of the lands) which arises
rebate of P10.00 (for a supposed total of P.70.00 per sq. meter),
out of their contract to sell (ex contractu). However, as held in
with the condition that Naguiat be able to build houses on the 4
Canos v. Peralta, the consolidation of a criminal action with a
lots within 6 months. Since he failed to do so, TSDC alleges he is
civil action arising not ex delicto, may still be done, based upon
liable to pay the P10.00 difference for each sq. meter. Naguiat
the express authority of Section 1, Rule 31 of the Rules of Court,
filed a criminal case against Lazatin for violation of PD957, for
failure to deliver the lots upon full payment made by him. In
which provides:

CRIM PRO

"Section 1. Consolidation. When actions involving a common

question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may
order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in
the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated; and it
may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may
tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay."
A Court may order several actions pending before it to be tried
together where they arise from the same act, event or
transaction, involve the same or like issues, and depend largely
or substantially on the same evidence, provided that the court
has jurisdiction over the cases to be consolidated and that a
joint trial will not give one party an undue advantage or
prejudice the substantial rights of any of the parties.

| B2015
CASES

The obvious purpose of the above rule is to avoid multiplicity of

suits, to guard against oppression and abuse, to prevent delays,
to clear congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial
court; in short the attainment of justice with the least expense
and vexation to the parties litigants.
In this case, the issues are alike, and they depend substantially
on the same evidence.
RULING:
Consolidation of civil case and criminal case is proper.