BELLO VS. COURT OF APEALS Case No. 15G. R.

L-38161 (March 29, 1974)

Facts:

Petitioners falsely appealed a case to the Court of First Instance, which should have been taken
directly to Respondent Court. The Prosecutorfiled a petition to dismiss appeal. Petitioners
invoked an analogous provision (Rule 50, Sec. 3) directing the Court of Appeals in cases
erroneously brought to it to certify the case to the proper court. The Court of First Instance still
ordered the dismissal of the appeal. Petitioners then filed their petition for prohibition and
mandamus to prohibit the execution of judgment and elevate the appeal to Respondent Court.
They dismissed the petition. Although Respondent Court recognized that the Court of First
Instance may have exercised its inherent powers to direct appeal to Respondent Court, it held
that Petitioners did not implead the Court of First Instance as principal party respondent and
thus it could not grant any relief at all even on the assumption that Petitioners can be said to
deserve some equities.

Issue:

Within the case should be elevated to Respondent Court despite finality of judicial decision.

Held:

Yes. The Court of First Instance acted with grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court
cautions against narrowly interpreting a statute ,defeating its purpose and stressed that it is the
essence of judicial duty to construe statutes as to avoid such a deplorable result of injustice
orabsurdity. The provision should also be taken within the context and spirit of Rule 50,
Sec. 3as an analogous provision. The Supreme Court finds no reason as to why the court
cannot act in all fairness and justice to be bound by the same rule