Doctrine
The RTC has no jurisdiction to rule on the parties’ civil liability arising from the Contract to Sell.
Facts
Petitioner, Viven M. Cadungog, was the owner and developer of Sophela Tower Condominium in Lahug, Cebu City. Sometime in 2008, petitioner entered into a Contract to Sell with Sung Ha Jung (respondent), for the total consideration of PHP 3,500,000.00. Respondent agreed to pay PHP 175,000.00 upon the signing of the Contract to Sell as downpayment, while the balance and transfer taxes shall be paid upon delivery of the unit.
Petitioner argues that upon completion of the condominium project, she informed respondent and asked for the payment of the balance amounting to PHP 3,325,000.00. However, respondent only paid PHP 3,066,000, resulting in an unpaid balance of PHP 258,950.00. Hence, petitioner refused to deliver the unit to the respondent.
On the other hand, respondent narrated that sometime in early 2009, petitioner told the respondent that she was in urgent need of money and that if respondent gave her PHP 3,066,000.00, she would immediately deliver the condo unit to the respondent. However, despite complying with petitioner’s request, she still failed to deliver the condo unit.
Hence, the respondent filed an Affidavit of Complaint against the petitioner before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Cebu, alleging failure of the petitioner to deliver the title despite full payment. The RTC acquitted the petitioner of the criminal charge, but made a judgment on civil liability and ordered the petitioner to either deliver the unit upon full payment or refund the paid amounts to the respondent.
Hence, the petitioner argued before the Supreme Court that pursuant to PD 1344, it is the HLURB that has exclusive jurisdiction over claims for specific performance or claims for refund by subdivision or condominium buyers against the developer.
ISSUE: Whether or not the RTC had jurisdiction to hear and decide the civil aspect of Criminal Case No. CBU-90099
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that the RTC has no jurisdiction to rule on the civil liability arising from the Contract to Sell entered into by the parties.
Under PD 957, it is the National Housing Authority that has exclusive jurisdiction to regulate the real estate trade and business. Later, PD 1344 expanded the NHA’s jurisdiction to hear and decide cases involving specific performance of contractual and statutory obligations filed by buyers of subdivision lots or condominium units against the owner, developer, dealer, broker, or salesman, among others.
In this case, the dispute concerned the failure to deliver a condo unit despite payment, which was a purely contractual issue. The proper forum was the HSAC, not the RTC, even if such claim was made in a criminal proceeding. Thus, even if the criminal aspect is within the RTC’s jurisdiction, the civil aspect must be heard by the HSAC.