BF CITILAND CORPORATION, PETITIONER, VS. MARILYN B.
OTAKE, RESPONDENT. G.R. No. 173351, July 29, 2010.
“x x x.
Section 2, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court states:
(a) Ordinary appeal. – The
appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in
the exercise of its original jurisdiction shall be taken by filing a notice of
appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from
and serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party. x x x
(b) Petition for review. –
The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court
in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review
in accordance with Rule 42. (Emphasis supplied)
x x x x
The Rule is clear. In cases decided by the RTC in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction, appeal to the Court of Appeals is taken
by filing a notice of appeal. On the other hand, in cases decided by the RTC in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, appeal to the Court of Appeals is
by a petition for review under Rule 42.
A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 does not
interrupt the course of the principal case unless a temporary restraining order
or a writ of preliminary injunction from further proceeding has been issued
against the public respondent.1 A petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is,
without a doubt, an original action.2
Since the decision of the RTC in the petition for
certiorari under Rule 65 was rendered in the exercise of its original
jurisdiction, appeal from the said RTC decision to the Court of Appeals should
have been made by filing a notice of appeal, not a petition for review under
Rule 42.
X x x.”
