Rivera v. Florendo

Aquilino Rivera v. Hon. Alfredo Florendo A)$HOR : Magsino, Patricia Marie C. G. R. No. L-57586 (Oct. 08 !"86#  NOTES: Transfer fer of shares shares;; Remedy Remedy if regist registrat ration ion is $O%&': Trans refused %ONN$: Paras, J. FA'$*+ Petitioner cororation, !u"iyama #ote$ % Restaurants, &nc., 'as organi(ed and registered under Phi$iine • $a's 'ith a caita$ stoc) of P*,+++,+++ diided into *+,+++ shares of P*++.++ ar a$ue each -y the etitioner  /ui$ino Riera and 0 1not named in case2 other incororators &samu )asa)o, )asa)o, a Jaanese nationa$ and co3etitioner 'ho is a$$eged$y the rea$ o'ner of the shares of stoc) in • the name of etitioner Riera, so$d 4,55+ shares of stoc)s to riate resondents Mi$agros Tsuchiya and 6ourdes Jureidini for a consideration of Ph 00+,+++ 'ith the assurance that Tsuchiya Tsuchiya 'i$$ -e made President, and Jureidini 'i$$ -e made director of the cororation after the urchase of the shares of stoc)s Riera assured Tsuchiya that he 'ou$d sign the stoc) certificates -ecause )asa)o 'as the rea$ o'ner of the • shares of stoc)s under Riera7s name • After the sale was consummated and the consideration was paid; Rivera refused to make the indorsement – stating that he will only do so if he is also paid • Tsuchiya and Jureidini attempted several times to register the stock certificates with the corporation but it was refused Respondents Tsuchiya and Jureidini filed a special civil action for mandamus • &**)(*#: • •

8as mandamus the roer remedy9  NO. 8as id SEC or the r egu$ar courts hae "urisdiction oer the case9  Re,ular court ad /uridiction.

HL: • •

NO. 1anda2u 3ill not lie. Ri,t of te 4artie 3ill e treed out in an ordinar action 'A* &* R1AN $O LOR 'O)R$

RA$&O: Shares of stoc) may -e transferred -y de$iery to the transferee of the certificate roer$y indorsed • Tit$e may -e ested in the transferee -y de$iery of the certificate 'ith a 'ritten assignment or indorsement • The Court he$d that mandamus is not the roer remedy in a case 'here the are of toc9 in quetion are not • even indored -y the registered o'ner 1Riera2; 'ho secifica$$y resists the registration of the shares of stoc)s in the -oo)s of the cororation The Court he$d that een the shares of stoc) 'hich 'ere urchased -y riate resondents from the other  • incororators can7t a$so -e the su-"ect of mandamus on the strength of mere indorsement of the suosed o'ners of said shares in the a-sence of e