XVIII. Tomas was criminally charged with serious physical injuries allegedly committed against Darvin. During the pendency of the criminal case, Darvin filed a separate civil action for damages based on the injuries he had sustained. Tomas filed a motion to dismiss the separate civil action on the ground of litis pendentia, pointing out that when the criminal action was filed against him, the civil action to recover the civil liability from the offense charged was also deemed instituted. He insisted that the basis of the separate civil action was the very same act that gave rise to the criminal action. Rule on Tomas' motion to dismiss, with brief reasons. (5%)