ANCHETA V.

ANCHETA
petition for review on certiorari
-CA dismissed the petitioners petition under Rule 47 -annul order of Specpro (nullify marriage)
Got married in 1959.
Lived in Muntinlupa
-had 8 children
1992 respondent left conjugal home
-1994 petitioner filed a petition with RTC for dissolution of conjugal partnership and judicial separation of property
with a plea for support and support pendente lite.
-that time, the petitioner was renting a in Las Pinas
-parties executed a Compromise Agreement where some of the conjugal properties were adjudicated to the
petitioner and her eight children (property in Cavite) court rendered judgment based on this comp. agreement
-petitioner, with the knowledge of the respondent, thenceforth resided in the said property.
Respondent intended to marry. -filed petition for declaration on nullity of marriage.. psychological incapacity
-Served summons in Las Pinas (although know that petitioner resides in Cavite)
-declared in default, no objection from public prosecutor, presentation of evidence ex parte, nullity(judgment)
-verified petition against the respondent with the Court of Appeals under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court, as amended,
for the annulment of the order of the RTC
CA - the absence of any clear and specific averment by petitioner that the ordinary remedies of
new trial,
appeal,
petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of petitioner.
Neither is there any averment or allegation that the present petition is based only on the grounds of extrinsic fraud
and lack of jurisdiction.
MR amended petition denied
SC
An original action in CA under Rule 47 as amended, to annul a judgment or final order or resolution in civil actions of
the RTC may be based on two grounds:
(a) extrinsic fraud; or
(b) lack of jurisdiction.
If based on extrinsic fraud, the remedy is subject to a condition precedent, namely, the ordinary remedies of :
1. new trial,
2. appeal
3. petition for relief or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the petitioner.
The petitioner must allege in the petition (also explain and justify her failure to avail of such remedies) that
the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief from judgment, under Rule 38 of the Rules of Court are
no longer available through no fault of hers; otherwise, the petition will be dismissed.
If the petitioner fails to avail of the remedies of new trial, appeal or relief from judgment through her own fault or
negligence before filing her petition with the Court of Appeals, she cannot resort to the remedy under Rule 47 of the
Rules; otherwise, she would benefit from her inaction or negligence.
In the case, petitioner failed to allege in the petition
CA failed to take note from the material allegations that the petition was based not only on extrinsic fraud but also on
lack of jurisdiction over the person of the petitioner, on her claim that the summons and the copy of the complaint
in were not served on her.
Article 48. In all cases of annulment or declaration of absolute nullity of marriage, the Court shall order the
prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned to it to appear on behalf of the State to take steps to prevent collusion
between the parties and to take care that evidence is not fabricated or suppressed.

SANTOS v. SANTOS
The proper remedy for a judicial declaration of presumptive death obtained by extrinsic fraud is an action to annul the
judgment. An affidavit of reappearance is not the proper remedy when the person declared presumptively dead has never
been absent.
Petition for review on certiorari
CA dismissed the petition for the annulment of the trial court's judgment declaring petitioner presumptively dead kc wrong
remedy daw.
Respondent left home to work abroad. 12 years missing from the filing of presumptive death. That an affidavit should be
filed in the civil registry for the reappearance.
*lacks well-founded belief of disappearance

Petitioner extrinsic fraud was committed. That there is also no valid service of summons, that other remedies are
not availed
Annulment of judgment is the remedy when the Regional Trial Court's judgment, order, or resolution has become final, and
the "remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief (or other appropriate remedies) are no longer available through no fault
of the petitioner."

36
chanroble slaw

The grounds for annulment of judgment are extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.