[SEC CASE NO. 3161. October 30, 1987.]
TORMIL REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ET AL., complainants,vs. MANUEL A. TORRES, JR., ET AL., respondents.
[SEC CASE NO. 3153. October 30, 1987.]
TORMIL REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,complainant,vs. MANUEL A. TORRES, JR., respondent.
O R D E R
In the wake of respondents' failure to appear for the last two hearings without any justifiable reason the Commission issued an "ORDER", wherein it considered the respondents as having waived their right to cross-examine witnesses and to adduce evidence in their favor. ScCIaA
The said ORDER is now the subject of respondents' "Motion For Reconsideration" which makes an outcry against denial of their right to be heard and thus plead for the Commission's liberality in applying the rules on procedure. HIETAc
The petitioners in opposing respondents' "Motion" argued: "This time, respondents have thrown in another dilatory ploy in the form of a motion for reconsideration, the hearing of which they themselves scheduled but as expected, did not even bother to attend." And yet the incident of "injunction and appointment of a receiver by their very nature require prompt...
