[ G.R. NO. L-37427. June 25, 1974 ] 156 Phil. 408
EN BANC
[ G.R. NO. L-37427. June 25, 1974 ]
CHEMPLEX (PHILIPPINES) INC. AND TOMMY P. S. LIM, PETITIONERS, VS. HON. RAMON C. PAMATIAN, BENIGNO D. LIM, CARMEN L. LIM, AQUILES J. LOPEZ AND SIXTO T. ANTONIO, RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N
In G.R. No. L-37427, Chemplex Philippines, Inc. and Tommy P.S. Lim, Petitioners vs. Hon. Ramon C. Pamatian, Benigno D. Lim, Carmen L. Lim, Aquiles J. Lopez and Sixto T. Antonio, Respondents, the COURT, after considering the allegations of the parties in the voluminous pleadings they have filed and the numerous annexes thereto, as well as the order of the respondent Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal (the late Ramon C. Pamatian, who was subsequently appointed Justice of the Court of Appeals), which order, dated August 29,1973, was issued by him after due hearing and reception of evidence concerning the incident for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction as prayed for by the defendants below, now respondents herein, and is now challenged in the instant petition for certiorari, RESOLVED to dismiss said petition for lack of merit, there being no showing of grave abuse of discretion, and to lift the restraining order dated September 11, 1973. Makalintal C.J., Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Esguerra, Fernandez and Aquino, JJ., explaining their votes in separate opinions, Castro, J,, concurring in the separate opinion of Makalintal, C.J.; and Makalintal, C.J., and Castro, J., concurring in the separate opinion of Fernandez, J.; Teehankee, Makasiar, Antonio and Munoz Palma, JJ., voted to give due course and to grant the petition, with Teehankee, J., explaining his vote in a separate opinion, concurred in by Makasiar, Antonio and Munoz Palma, JJ.; and Barredo, J, reserved his vote and explained the same in a separate opinion. The Court further RESOLVED unanimously to direct the respondent Court to act on this case with reasonable dispatch, considering the need for early settlement of the controversy between the parties, and to suggest (with Makalintal, C.J., voting against making such suggestion) to the respondent Court to consider the advisability of a receivership in the case before it.