ESTRELLA TIONGCO YARED (now deceased) substituted by one of her heirs, CARMEN

MATILDE M. TIONGCO, petitioner, vs. HON. RICARDO M. ILARDE, Presiding Judge,

Regional Trial Court of Iloilo, Br. 26, JOSE B. TIONGCO and ANTONIO G. DORONILA, JR.,
respondents.

[G.R. No. 114732. August 1, 2000]

FACTS:

On October 17, 1990, petitioner Estrella Tiongco Yared filed an amended complaint for
annulment of affidavit of adjudication, sales, transfer certificates of title, reconveyance and
damages against private respondents Jose B. Tiongco and Antonio Doronila, Jr. before the RTC,
Branch 26, Iloilo City.

To protect her interest, petitioner caused the annotation of a notice of lis pendens on the
Transfer Certificates of Title of the subject properties. On December 14, 1993, the respondent
judge, Hon. Ricardo M. Ilarde, issued a Decision dismissing petitioners’ complaint and private
respondent’s counterclaim on the ground that the petitioner’s cause of action had already
prescribed.

On December 17, 1993, petitioner filed a notice of appeal. Respondent Tiongco then filed
a Motion for Cancellation of notice of lis pendens. Respondent’s first and second Motions for
Consideration were denied. He then filed his third Motion for Reconsideration which was found to
be persuasive, hence, in an Order dated February 14, 1994, the respondent judge granted the
cancellation of a notice of lis pendens.

Petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration. On March 4, 1994, the court reversed its
order on the ground, among others, that the records had been ordered elevated to the Court of
Appeals. Petitioner filed another motion for reconsideration and the respondent judge issued this
assailed order which installed an earlier order cancelling the notice of lis pendens on the ground
that the lis pendens is not a matter litigated in the appeal and the records have not yet been
transmitted to the appelate court.

Feeling that a motion for reconsideration would be fruitless, petitioner filed the instant
special civil action for certiorari.

ISSUE:

Whether or not petitioner’s filing of the instant special civil action for certiorari violates the
doctrine of hierarchy of courts.

RULING:

Yes, petitioner’s filing of the instant special civil action for certiorari clearly violates the
doctrine of hierarchy of courts, thus the court dismissed the petition. Only the presence of
exceptional and compelling reasons justified a disregard of the doctrine of hierarchy of courts.
Petitioner has failed to advance a satisfactory explanation as to her failure to comply with the
principle of judicial hierarchy. There is no reason why the petition could not have been brought
before the Court of Appeals, considering all the more that the appeal of the main case was already
before it.