Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1918 > March 1918 Decisions > G.R. No. L-13381 March 11, 1918 - MAXIMINA VALDEZ v. RAMON QUERUBIN

037 Phil 774:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-13381. March 11, 1918. ]

MAXIMINA VALDEZ, Petitioner, v. RAMON QUERUBIN, as justice of the peace of the municipality of Vigan, Province of Ilocos Sur, ET AL., Respondents.

Vicente Foz and Jose Singson Tongson for Petitioner.

Alberto Reyes and Eusebio Orense for Respondents.

SYLLABUS


1. APPEAL; AMOUNT OF BOND. — Where the purpose of the requirement of a bond is to secure the person in whose favor the bond is executed from loss or damage to real property in which he claims an interest, pending an appeal, such real estate being the subject matter in litigation between the party executing the bond and the party in whose favor it is executed, the amount of the bond which should be required in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion is not, in the absence of special circumstances the total value of the real estate or an amount in excess thereof, but an amount reasonably sufficient to cover the estimated value of the fruits and profits of the real estate pending the litigation, and such damage to the real estate as may reasonably be anticipated under all the circumstances existing at the time when the bond is executed.

2. ID.; ID.; ABUSE OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION; CERTIORARI. — Certiorari lies from the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands to a Court of First Instance to control a manifest abuse of discretion in fixing the amount of a supersedeas bond.

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID. — An order requiring the filing of an additional supersedeas bond in an unreasonable, excessive and practically prohibitive sum annulled in certiorari proceedings.


D E C I S I O N


CARSON, J. :


Without stopping to consider any of the nice questions raised in the course of these proceedings as to the jurisdiction of the respondent justice of the peace, acting as judge of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur under authority of the provisions of Act No. 2131, to direct the execution of the judgment referred to in the complaint in these proceedings and in his order of October 11, 1917, which was entered in the case of Arcebal Et. Al. v. Valdez [R. G. No. 1067], in the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, we are all of opinion that even if he had jurisdiction in the premises, there was a manifest abuse of his discretion in the requirement that the defendant administrator in that action file a bond, in the nature of a subsidiary bond, in the sum of P91,000 in addition to the bond in the sum of P45,000 already filed by him and approved.

The requirement of the additional bond, as appears from the order itself, is based on a finding by the trial court that the lands in litigation appear to be worth P100,000, and that the true value of the subject matter in litigation would seem to be greater than the amount of the original bond of P45,000. But these lands, in the possession of an administrator of the court, could not take wings and fly away, pending the appeal from the judgment; and the bond of P45,000 which had already been given is manifestly more than sufficient to protect the interests of the appellees against all possible loss or damage arising from the retention of the real state in the hands of the administrator.

Where the purpose of the requirement of a bond is to secure the person in whose favor the bond is executed from loss or damage to real property in which he claims an interest, pending an appeal, such real estate being the subject matter in litigation between the party executing the bond and the party in whose favor it is executed, the amount of the bond which should be required in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion is not, in the absence of special circumstances, the total value of the real estate or an amount in excess thereof, but an amount reasonably sufficient to cover the estimated value of the fruits and profits of the real estate pending the litigation, and such damage to the real estate as may reasonably be anticipated under all the circumstances existing at the time when the bond is executed. In the instant case, the original bond was more than sufficient to secure the rights of the appellees, without the necessity for the requirement of an additional bond from the administrator (who holds the land subject to the control of the court which appointed him) in the unreasonable, excessive and practically prohibitive sum of P91,000.

We conclude that the order complained of should be annulled, and that the preliminary injunction heretofore issued prohibiting the respondents from all attempts to levy execution on the land in question by virtue of the terms of that order should be made permanent, with the costs of these proceedings against the respondents other than the respondent judge.

Ten days hereafter let judgment be entered in conformity herewith, and twenty days thereafter let certified copies of the temporary injunction, of this decision, and of the judgment entered in these proceedings be forwarded to the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur for file with the record in the case of Arcebal Et. Al. v. Valdez [R. G. No. 1067] of that court; and thereupon let the record of these proceedings be filed with the archives of original proceedings in this court. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J. ; Torres, Johnson, Araullo, Street, Malcolm, Avanceña, and Fisher, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






March-1918 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 11595 March 2, 1918 - CATALINA INFANTE v. JUSTO TOLEDO, ET AL.

    044 Phil 834

  • G.R. No. L-13109 March 6, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. DALMACIO ANTIPOLO

    037 Phil 726

  • G.R. No. L-12592 March 8, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. FELIPE BUSTOS ET AL.

    037 Phil 731

  • G.R. No. L-12890 March 8, 1918 - BERNABE FLORES v. JOSE ZURBITO ET AL.

    037 Phil 746

  • G.R. No. L-12838 March 9, 1918 - FELIX MEDIRAN v. MAXIMIANO VILLANUEVA ET AL.

    037 Phil 752

  • G.R. No. L-13017 March 9, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. ENRIQUE ITURRIUS ET AL.

    037 Phil 762

  • G.R. No. L-13173 March 11, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. DANIEL O’CONNELL

    037 Phil 767

  • G.R. No. L-13381 March 11, 1918 - MAXIMINA VALDEZ v. RAMON QUERUBIN

    037 Phil 774

  • G.R. No. L-13177 March 12, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. FELINO CUNANAN

    037 Phil 777

  • G.R. No. 9989 March 13, 1918 - EDUARDO CUAYCONG ET AL. v. RAMONA BENEDICTO ET AL.

    037 Phil 781

  • G.R. No. L-13314 March 13, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN DINOLA

    037 Phil 798

  • G.R. No. L-11528 March 15, 1918 - MIGUEL VELASCO v. JEAN M. POIZAT

    037 Phil 802

  • G.R. No. L-12219 March 15, 1918 - AMADO PICART v. FRANK SMITH

    037 Phil 809

  • G.R. No. L-12406 March 15, 1918 - MARIANO LIM v. ANSELMO SINGIAN, ET AL.

    037 Phil 817

  • G.R. No. L-12753 March 15, 1918 - MARCOS PAULINO v. JUAN CAILLES

    037 Phil 825

  • G.R. No. L-11900 March 16, 1918 - TERESA GUERRERO ET AL. v. SIA YUTIAN

    037 Phil 832

  • G.R. No. L-13081 March 20, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. MOHAMAD UNGAL

    037 Phil 835

  • G.R. No. L-11346 March 21, 1918 - ESPIRIDIONA CANUTO v. JUAN MARIANO

    037 Phil 840

  • G.R. No. 12005 March 21, 1918 - SUN LIFE INSURANCE CO. OF CANADA v. RUEDA HERMANOS & CO., ET AL.

    037 Phil 844

  • G.R. No. L-12475 March 21, 1918 - MANILA RAILROAD CO. v. MACONDRAY & CO.

    037 Phil 850

  • G.R. No. L-13333 March 21, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. BRIGIDO RAZON, ET AL.

    037 Phil 856

  • G.R. No. 11970 March 22, 1918 - FABIAN B. S. ABELLARA v. HERMENEGILDO BALANAG ET AL.

    037 Phil 865

  • G.R. No. 12045 March 22, 1918 - CLARA RODRIGUEZ v. CATALINO PAMINTUAN, ET AL.

    037 Phil 876

  • G.R. No. L-12371 March 23, 1918 - LEOPOLDO CRIADO v. GUTIRREZ HERMANOS

    037 Phil 883

  • G.R. No. L-10812 March 26, 1918 - JOSE P. HENSON v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL.

    037 Phil 912

  • G.R. No. L-11390 March 26, 1918 - EL BLANCO ESPAÑOL-FILINO v. VICENTE PALANCA

    037 Phil 921

  • G.R. No. L-12270 March 26, 1918 - UNITED STATES v. RUFO TIONGCO ET. AL.

    037 Phil 951

  • G.R. No. L-12182 March 27, 1918 - VIUDA E HIJOS DE PEDRO P. ROXAS v. JAMES RAFFERTY

    037 Phil 957

  • G.R. No. L-12900 March 27, 1918 - JUDGMENT SIMAN v. SATURNINO LEUS, ET AL.

    037 Phil 967