TAMIN vs CA

G.R. No. 97477 May 8, 1992 RTC JUDGE CAMILO E. TAMIN, Presii!" J#"e, Re"io!a$ Tria$ Co#r%, &ra!'( 2), Mo$a*e Mo$a*e,, +a-oa +a-oa!"a !"a e$ #r a! %(e MUNIC MUNICIP IPAL ALIT/ IT/ O0 DUMIN DUMINGA GAG, G, +AM& +AM&OA OANG NGA A DEL DEL UR UR rer reres ese! e!%e %e  -y MA/ MA/OR DOMI DOMICI CIAN ANO O E. REAL, petitioners, vs. COURT O0 AP PE PEAL , 3I CE CENTE MED IN INA a ! ! 0 OR ORTUN AT ATA ROELLON, respondents. 0ACT

The complaint alleged alleged that the plaintiff plaintiff (petitioner (petitioner municipality municipality herein) is the owner of a  parcel of residential land located at Poblacion, Dumingag, Zamboanga del Sur with an area of ,!"# s$uare meters more or less% that the parcel of land was reserved for public pla&a under Presidential Proclamation 'o.  dated *arch +, +"!% that during the incumbency of the late *ayor sidoro -. eal, Sr. or in +"!, the municipality leased an /rea of +,0 s$uare meters to the defendants (respondents herein) sub1ect to the condition that they should vacate the place in case it is needed for public purposes% that the defendants religiously paid the rentals until +"2% that thereafter, the defendants refused to pay the rentals% that the incumbent mayor discovered that the defendants filed a 34adastral /nswer3 over over said said lot% lot% that that the defendant defendantss refuse refused d to vacate vacate the place place despit despitee effort effortss of the municipality% that the national government had alloted an appropriation for the construction of a municipal gymnasium within the public pla&a but the said construction which was already started could not continue because of the presence of the buildings constructed by the defendants% that the appropriation for the construction of the gymnasium might be reverted bac5 to the national government which would result to 3irreparable damage, in1ury and pre1udice3 to the municipality and its people who are e6pected to derive benefit from the accomplishment of the pro1ect. The complaint prayed7 +. That a restraining order shall be issued immediately after the filing of  this case% 8. That after due notice and hearing, a writ of preliminary mandatory in1unction shall be issued against the herein defendants for them  sic)  sic ( ) form further occupying the leased portion to them ( sic),  sic), and9or that a :rit :rit of Possession Possession be immediately immediately issued to preserve preserve the rights of the herein plaintiff% . That 1udgment should be entered against the herein defendants to vacate the premises of  the leased portion given to them nstead of filing an answer, the respondents filed a motion to dismiss alleging the lac5 of   1urisdiction of the trial court, since the complaint is f or illegal detainer which is within the

original 1urisdiction of the municipal court and the pendency of a cadastral case between the parties over the ownership of the same parcel of land. ;n ;ctober +0, +""0, the petitioner