FACTS:

The private respondents, heirs of the late Macalabo Alompo, filed a Complaint with the Shari'a District Court of Marawi City against the petitioner, Municipality of Tangkal, for recovery of possession and ownership of a parcel of land. They claimed that Macalabo entered into an agreement with the Municipality in 1962, allowing them to "borrow" the land for 35 years under the condition that they should pay the value of the land within that period. The Municipality failed to do so, and the private respondents sought for the land to be returned to them.

The Municipality filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that it cannot be considered a Muslim under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, thus the Shari'a District Court has no jurisdiction over the case. The Shari'a District Court denied the motion and held that since the mayor of the Municipality is a Muslim, the court has jurisdiction. The Municipality filed a motion for reconsideration, which was also denied. As a result, the Municipality elevated the case to the Supreme Court through a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus with a prayer for a temporary restraining order.

During the proceedings, the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order against the Shari'a District Court from holding any further proceedings in the case.

The Municipality argued that although the Special Rules of Procedure in Shari'a Courts prohibits the filing of a motion to dismiss, this rule may be relaxed when the ground relied on is lack of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court stated that the jurisdictional infirmity is apparent on the face of the complaint, and the court should have dismissed the case. The court also clarified that an order denying a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order that cannot be questioned through a special civil action for certiorari, which is designed to correct errors of jurisdiction and not errors of judgment.

ISSUES:

1. Whether or not the Shari'a District Court of Marawi City has jurisdiction in an action for recovery of possession filed by Muslim individuals against a municipality whose mayor is a Muslim.

RULING:

1. No, the Shari'a District Court of Marawi City does not have jurisdiction in an action for recovery of possession filed by Muslim individuals against a municipality whose mayor is a Muslim. The jurisdiction of the Shari'a District Court is limited to personal and real actions wherein the parties involved are Muslims, except those for forcible entry and unlawful detainer. Therefore, since the petitioner, Municipality of Tangkal, does not have a religious affiliation and does not represent any cultural or ethnic tribe, it cannot be considered as a Muslim under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws. The action for recovery of possession is a real action and should have been filed in the appropriate Regional Trial Court of Lanao del Norte.

PRINCIPLES:

• The jurisdiction of a court may be challenged at any time and at any stage of the action, even if a motion to dismiss is disallowed (Rulona-Al Awadhi v. Astih).

• When it is apparent from the pleadings that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, it is duty-bound to dismiss the case regardless of whether a motion to dismiss was filed (Villagracia v. Fifth Shari'a District Court).

• The denial of a motion to dismiss is an interlocutory order that cannot be questioned in a special civil action for certiorari, as such remedy is designed to correct errors of jurisdiction and not errors of judgment.