Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1959 > March 1959 Decisions > G.R. No. L-12343 March 23, 1959 - LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY v. ALFONSO LOPEZ

105 Phil 327:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-12343. March 23, 1959.]

LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALFONSO LOPEZ, ET AL., Defendants. ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO. INC., surety-appellant.

Jose Agbulos for Appellee.

Raul A. Aristorenas and Benjamin Relova for Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. EXECUTION; SURETYSHIP AND GUARANTY; WHEN NO JUDGMENT AGAINST SURETY; ISSUANCE OF AN alias WRIT OF EXECUTION. — The provisions of section 10 Rule 62 and Sections 10 and 20 of Rule 59 of the Rules of Court are mandatory and require that the application for damages against the surety or bondsmen and the award thereof be made after hearing and before the entry of final judgment; that if the judgment under execution contains no directive for the surety to pay, and the proper party fails to make any claim for such directive before said judgment had become final and executory, the surety or bondsmen cannot late be made liable under the bond. (Abelow v. De la Riva, Et Al., supra, p. 159; Riel v. Lacson, G. R. No. L-9863 September 29, 1958; Port Motors Inc. v. Raposas, 53 Off. Gaz. No. 8, p. 2450; Visayan Surety & Insurance Co. v. Aquino, Et Al., 96 Phil, 900; Del Rosario v. Nava, 95 Phil., 637; Aguasin v. Velasquez, Et Al., 88 Phil., 357; Comments on the Rules of Court, Moran, 1957 Ed., Vol. 2, p. 50).


D E C I S I O N


REYES, J.B.L., J.:


From the order of the Court of First Instance of Manila (Civil Case No. 22733) granting the plaintiff-appellee’s (Luneta Motor Company) motion for the issuance of an alias writ of execution against the appellant Alto Surety & Insurance Co., Inc., and from the order denying the latter’s motion for reconsideration, the surety company has interposed the present appeal.

On June 6, 1953, defendant Alfonso Lopez bought the motor vehicle described in the complaint, and borrowed from the appellee Luneta Motor Company P8,800, which he promised to pay in 15 monthly installments. As security therefore, Lopez executed a chattel mortgage on the same vehicle, said lien being duly registered in the Office of the Register of Deeds of Manila. Lopez made several payments, but defaulted in the sum of P4,630.32. After repeated demands to settle this balance of the indebtedness had been made and disregarded, the company commenced foreclosure proceedings on the chattel mortgage.

On January 2, 1954, before sale at public auction could be made, Lopez together with his co-defendant Faustino Dy (to whom the vehicle was sold subject to the chattel mortgage) effected a settlement with appellee, whereby the two promised to pay, jointly and severally, the unpaid portion of the promissory note. Thereupon, the sale was withdrawn and the truck released to Dy, still subject to the chattel mortgage.

Dy paid the appellee company P1,000, again leaving a balance of P3,827.17 including interest, which amount remained unpaid when the present action was instituted.

Upon petition of appellee and the filing of a replevin bond, the court issued a writ for the seizure of the car. The writ was later recalled upon petition of Dy, who filed a counter-bond in the amount of P12,000 furnished and subscribed by Dy as principal and the appellant Alto Surety & Insurance Co., Inc., as guarantor, under which the latter bound itself to answer, jointly and severally, with defendant Dy, for the delivery of the truck, if "such delivery is adjudged, and for the payment of such sum to him as may be recovered against the defendant and the costs of the action."cralaw virtua1aw library

On August 10, 1956, the lower court rendered judgment, the dispositive part of which reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"In view of the foregoing, the court orders defendants Alfonso Lopez and Faustino N. Dy to pay jointly and severally to the plaintiff Luneta Motor Co. the sum of P3,825.17, with 12% interest annually from July 9, 1954, until the whole amount is fully paid, plus 20% of said amount for attorney’s fees and plus costs. The chattel mortgage Exhibit "C" is hereby foreclosed.

Once this decision has become final and upon failure of the defendants to pay the said amounts, the Sheriff of Manila shall proceed to sell the truck in question at public auction as the law directs. For this purpose defendant Faustino N. Dy is ordered to deliver the truck in question to the Sheriff of Manila. The proceeds of said sale be applied in satisfaction of this decision.

Counterclaim and/or reconvention of defendant is dismissed."cralaw virtua1aw library

The decision having become final and executory, upon motion of appellee, the lower court, on October 4, 1956, issued a writ of execution against defendants Lopez and Dy. This writ was later returned unsatisfied by the Sheriff of Manila. Accordingly, on June 28, 1957, appellee filed a motion seeking for the issuance of an alias writ of execution against the appellant surety company for the amount awarded in the judgment. This was opposed on the ground, among others, that appellee failed to comply with section 10, Rule 62, in conjunction with section 20, Rule 59 of the Rules of Court. Nevertheless, on February 11, 1957, the lower court ordered the issuance of the alias writ and denied on March 8, 1957, a motion for reconsideration of the same.

The appeal is well-taken. Only one point of law is in issue and it is the propriety of the lower court’s action in ordering the issuance of the alias writ of execution against the appellant company, such order having been applied for and granted after the main decision had long become final and executory.

The provisions of the Rules of Court on this point, particularly section 10 of Rule 62, in connection with section 20 of Rule 59, state:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SEC. 10. Judgment to include recovery against sureties. — The amount, if any, to be awarded to either party upon any bond filed by the other in accordance with the provisions of this rule, shall be claimed, ascertained, and granted under the same procedure as prescribed in section 20 of Rule 59." (Rule 62).

"SEC. 20. Claim for damages of plaintiff’s bond on account of illegal attachment. — If the judgment on the action be in favor of the defendant, he may recover, upon the bond given by the plaintiff, damages resulting from the attachment. Such damages may be awarded only upon application and after proper hearing, and shall be included in the final judgment. The application must be filed before the trial, or, in the discretion of the court before entry of the final judgment, with due notice to the plaintiff and his surety or sureties, setting forth the facts showing his right to damages and the amount thereof. Damages sustained during the pendency of an appeal may be claimed by the defendant, if the judgment of the appellate court be favorable to him, by filing an application therewith, with notice to the plaintiff and his surety or sureties, and the appellate court may allow the application to be heard and decided by the trial court." (Rule 59) (Emphasis supplied).

Applying the foregoing rules, this Court, in a long line of cases (subsequent to that of Florentino v. Domadag, Et Al., 45 Off. No. 11, 4937, 4940, promulgated May 14, 1948 cited by the appellee), has held that the above provisions of law are mandatory and require the application for damages against the surety or bondsmen and the award thereof to be made after hearing and before the entry of the final judgment; that if the judgment under execution contains no directive for the surety to pay, and the proper party fails to make any claim for such directive before such judgment had become final and executory, the surety or bondsmen cannot be later made liable under the bond. (Abelow v. De la Riva, Et Al., supra, p. 159; Riel v. Lacson, L-9863, Sept. 29, 1958; Port Motors Inc. v. Raposas, 100 Phil., 732; 53 Off. Gaz., No. 8, p. 2450; Visayan Surety & Insurance Co. v. Aquino, Et Al., 88 Phil., 900; Del Rosario v. Nava, 95 Phil., 637; 50 Off. Gaz., [9] 4189; Liberty Construction Supply Co. v. Pecson, Et Al., 89 Phil., 50; Aguasia v. Velasquez Et. Al., 88 Phil., 357; Comments on the Rules of Court, Moran, 1957 Ed., Vol. 2, p. 50)

Here, it appears that the application for damages against the appellant surety company and the order issuing the alias writ of execution were made months after the decision had already become final and executory; hence, the alias writ is improperly issued and cannot be enforced against the surety.

Wherefore, the orders appealed from, upon which the alias writ of execution was issued against the appellant Alto Surety and Insurance Co., Inc. in favor of the appellee Luneta Motor Company, are reversed and set aside. Costs against the appellee. So ordered.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Padilla, Montemayor, Reyes, A., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion and Endencia, 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-1959 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-12163 March 4, 1959 - PAZ FORES v. IRENEO MIRANDA

    105 Phil 267

  • G.R. No. L-10460 March 11, 1959 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. JUANA B. VDA. DE DEL ROSARIO

    105 Phil 277

  • G.R. No. L-10611 March 13, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VIRGILIO DIVINAGRACIA

    105 Phil 281

  • G.R. No. L-11223 March 16, 1959 - PABLO C. VENTURA v. JUDGE NICASIO YATCO

    105 Phil 287

  • G.R. No. L-11596 March 16, 1959 - ALTO SURETY & INSURANCE CO. INC. v. ELEUTERIO LIMCACO, ET AL.

    105 Phil 295

  • G.R. No. L-11981 March 17, 1959 - CIRIACO SANTIAGO v. MANUEL CONDE

    105 Phil 298

  • G.R. No. L-11315 March 18, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUSTAQUIO HINAUT

    105 Phil 303

  • G.R. No. L-11741 March 18, 1959 - EL AHORRO INSULAR, ET AL. v. VICTORINO T. AQUINO

    105 Phil 307

  • G.R. No. L-14891 March 19, 1959 - ALFREDO B. SAULO v. PELAGIO CRUZ

    105 Phil 315

  • G.R. No. L-13204 March 20, 1959 - ENRIQUE C. SERVO v. MARIANO ALCANABA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 322

  • G.R. No. L-9724 March 23, 1959 - TOMAS B. BERVA v. THE CITY MAYOR AND CITY TREASURER OF NAGA CITY

    105 Phil 325

  • G.R. No. L-12343 March 23, 1959 - LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY v. ALFONSO LOPEZ

    105 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. L-12497 March 23, 1959 - PRIMITIVO A. MACARAIG v. VICENTE DY SUN

    105 Phil 332

  • G.R. No. L-12695 March 23, 1959 - CITY OF ILOILO v. REMEDIOS SIAN VILLANUEVA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. L-12698 March 23, 1959 - PHIL. NATIONAL BANK v. PHIL. SURETY & INSURANCE COMPANY

    105 Phil 344

  • G.R. Nos. 11928-11930 March 24, 1959 - VEDASTO JESALVA, ET AL. v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

    105 Phil 348

  • G.R. No. L-10883 March 25, 1959 - TERESA REALTY v. STATE CONSTRUCTION AND SUPPLY CO., ET AL.

    105 Phil 353

  • G.R. Nos. L- 12078-79 March 25, 1959 - MATIAS BELARMINO v. PANTALEON F. ALIHAN

    105 Phil 358

  • G.R. No. L-12703 March 25, 1959 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMA ORPILLA-MOLINA

    105 Phil 362

  • G.R. No. L-11472 March 30, 1959 - OBDULIA ARAGON, ET AL. v. FRANCISCO ARAGON, ET AL.

    105 Phil 365

  • G.R. No. L-11569 March 30, 1959 - ROGERIO GENDRALA v. TEOFISTO CORDOVA

    105 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. L-12729 March 30, 1959 - ARSENIO R. REYES v. MARCIAL DE LA CRUZ, ET AL.

    105 Phil 372

  • G.R. No. L-12944 March 30, 1959 - MARIA NATIVIDAD VDA. DE TAN v. VETERANS BACKPAY COMMISSION

    105 Phil 377

  • G.R. No. L-13298 March 30, 1959 - JOSE U. OCHATE v. DIEGO H. TY DELING, ET AL.

    105 Phil 384

  • G.R. No. L-7954 March 31, 1959 - B. A. CRUMB v. MARGARITO RODRIGUEZ

    105 Phil 391

  • G.R. No. L-10884 March 31, 1959 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. PHILIPPINE LEATHER CO. INC.

    105 Phil 400

  • G.R. No. L-11785 March 31, 1959 - GABINO BACHOCO v. IGNACIA ESPERANCILLA

    105 Phil 404

  • G.R. No. L-12064 March 31, 1959 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO ZURBANO

    105 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. L-12104 March 31, 1959 - CASIMIRO GARGANTA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    105 Phil 412

  • G.R. No. L-12128 March 31, 1959 - BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. ANTONIO NOBLEJAS

    105 Phil 418

  • G.R. No. L-12282 March 31, 1959 - BOARD OF DIRECTORS v. BIENVENIDO A. TAN

    105 Phil 426

  • G.R. No. L-12592 March 31, 1959 - TIBURCIO SOMERA, ET AL. v. AGRIPINO GALMAN, ET AL.

    105 Phil 431