FACTS:

The case involves a dispute over the ownership of certain lots within a subdivision known as Magdalena Rolling Hills, which the residents claimed had been reserved as an "open space" and could not be sold or encumbered. The subdivision was owned by Magdalena Estate, Inc. (MEI) and originally had a total area of 355,490 square meters. An amendment to the subdivision plan was approved by the City Council of Quezon City, which authorized the subdivision for disposition to the public and the release of the original open space. MEI resurveyed and subdivided the open space into several lots, some of which were sold to third parties. The purchasers of other subdivision lots filed a lawsuit against MEI and the Quezon City Government for the recovery of the open space for public use. Notices of lis pendens were inscribed on the titles of the lots in the subdivision. The trial court rendered judgment authorizing the plaintiffs to recover the open space from MEI and donate it to the Quezon City government. The Court of Appeals granted the motion to cancel the notice of lis pendens, finding that its annotation was intended to molest and harass the defendants. The plaintiffs filed a petition for certiorari to nullify the resolutions of the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and upheld the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to cancel the notice of lis pendens

RULING:

1. The Court of Appeals had jurisdiction to cancel the notice of lis pendens. A notice of lis pendens is an extrajudicial incident in an action, which does not affect the merits of the case. It is intended to warn people who deal with the property that they do so at their own risk, subject to the results of the action. The cancellation of a notice of lis pendens is a mere incident in the action and may be ordered by the court at any given time, even before final judgment. In this case, the Court of Appeals had power to deal with and resolve any incident in connection with the action subject of the appeal, including the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens. The Court of Appeals found that the case had been unnecessarily prolonged by repeated amendments of the complaints and that the annotation of the notice of lis pendens was intended to harass the defendants. Therefore, the cancellation of the notice of lis pendens by the Court of Appeals was proper.

PRINCIPLES:

• A notice of lis pendens is an extrajudicial incident in an action and does not affect the merits of the case.

• The cancellation of a notice of lis pendens is a mere incident in the action and may be ordered by the court at any given time, even before final judgment.

• The court may cancel a notice of lis pendens if it is shown that the notice is for the purpose of molesting the adverse party or that it is not necessary to protect the rights of the party who caused it to be recorded.