FACTS:

On May 18, 1966, petitioners filed an action for partition with the Court of First Instance of Cavite against respondents Lucina and Trinidad Samonte, as well as other defendants. The defendants filed their answer to the complaint on July 11, 1966, and an amended answer on January 4, 1967. On July 31, 1970, the Court of First Instance of Cavite rendered judgment in favor of the petitioners. The defendants did not appeal the decision, making it final and executory.

Before the writ of execution could be carried out, the defendants filed a petition with the Court of Appeals to annul the writ, which was dismissed on July 9, 1971. However, on May 27, 1972, respondents Lucina and Trinidad Samonte filed an action before the Court of First Instance of Rizal to annul the final judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance of Cavite. Petitioners' motion to dismiss the action was denied by the Court of First Instance of Rizal, prompting them to file the instant petition.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the Court of First Instance of Rizal (now RTC) committed grave abuse of discretion or acted without jurisdiction in denying the petitioners' motion to dismiss the action for annulment of the final and executory judgment rendered by the CFI of Cavite.

RULING:

1. The Court held that the issue to be resolved in this case is not one of jurisdiction but of venue. It was determined that the action to annul a final judgment or order should be filed with the Court of First Instance. The question is in what place (with what particular court of first instance) the action should be commenced and tried. The Court also ruled that the Court of First Instance of Rizal had the authority and jurisdiction as provided for by law to annul a final and executory judgment rendered by another court of first instance or by another branch of the same court.

PRINCIPLES:

• The facts alleged in the complaint and the law in force at the time of commencement of action determine the jurisdiction of a court.

• An action for the annulment of a judgment and an order of a court of justice belongs to the category of civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is not capable of pecuniary estimation.

• In an action to annul a final judgment or order, the choice of which court the action should be filed is not left to the parties; by legal mandate, the action should be filed with the Court of First Instance.

• The issue regarding the annulment of a judgment is a question of venue, not jurisdiction.