ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
June-1997 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 92462 June 2, 1997 - SANTIAGO GOKING v. ROLANDO R. VILLARAZA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 97896 June 2, 1997 - TEKNIKA SKILLS & TRADE SERVICES, INC. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116748 June 2, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARJORIE CASTILLO

  • G.R. No. 121434 June 2, 1997 - ELENA F. UICHICO, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120880 June 5, 1997 - FERDINAND R. MARCOS II v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76969 June 9, 1997 - INLAND REALTY INVESTMENT SERVICE, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89369 June 9, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO BERGONIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107259 June 9, 1997 - RAYMUNDO M. DAPITON, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108475 June 9, 1997 - GAMALIEL DINIO, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO E. LAGUESMA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115944 June 9, 1997 - ELVIRA C. GONZALES v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118536 June 9, 1997 - LAWIN SECURITY SERVICES, INC., ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 119362 & 120269 June 9, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICARDO O. RABOSA

  • G.R. No. 123905 June 9, 1997 - MARIA CRISTINA FERTILIZER CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 124280 June 9, 1997 - FLORA S. REYES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Bar Matter No. 730 June 10, 1997 - NEED THAT LAW STUDENT PRACTICING UNDER RULE 138-A BE SUPERVISED

  • G.R. No. 96999 June 10, 1997 - CARLOS O. YSMAEL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106812 June 10, 1997 - TAGAYTAY-TAAL TOURIST DEV. CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 107302, 107306 & 108559-60 June 10, 1997 - INDUSTRIAL TIMBER CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120074 June 10, 1997 - LEAH P. ADORIO v. LUCAS P. BERSAMIN

  • G.R. No. 120594 June 10, 1997 - ALFONSO TAN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123639 June 10, 1997 - ANTONIO M. GARCIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113713 June 11, 1997 - ORIENT EXPRESS PLACEMENT PHIL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116940 June 11, 1997 - PHIL-AM GENERAL INSURANCE CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117561 June 11, 1997 - JULIO MARCO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118041 June 11, 1997 - PHIMCO INDUSTRIES, INC. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 118921-22 June 11, 1997 - ERNESTO AUSTRIA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120956 June 11, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO MORENO, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-97-1248 June 13, 1997 - MARIEL ECUBE-BADEL v. DAVID DE LA PEÑA BADEL

  • G.R. Nos. 100513 & 111559 June 13, 1997 - SEVERINO ANTONIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 102467 June 13, 1997 - EQUITABLE BANKING CORP., ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 110817-22 June 13, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELINO A. BUGARIN

  • G.R. No. 111088 June 13, 1997 - C & M TIMBER CORP. v. ANGEL C. ALCALA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 113103 & 116000 June 13, 1997 - NAPOCOR, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114764 June 13, 1997 - WILFREDO T. PADILLA v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 4244 June 17, 1997 - BUHANGIN RESIDENTS & EMPLOYEES ASSN., ETC. v. CORAZON NUÑEZ-MALANYAON

  • G.R. No. 100920 June 17, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOLI SALCEDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109311 June 17, 1997 - ZENAIDA ASUNCION v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 110974-81 June 17, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE MANANSALA

  • G.R. No. 111357 June 17, 1997 - TRADERS ROYAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113799 June 17, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BIENVENIDO BAYDO

  • G.R. No. 119337 June 17, 1997 - BAYVIEW HOTEL, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120030 June 17, 1997 - ATLAS FERTILIZER CORP., ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120553 June 17, 1997 - PHILTRANCO SERVICE ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 120802 June 17, 1997 - JOSE T. CAPILI v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 121787 June 17, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDGARDO GREFALDIA

  • G.R. No. 121964 June 17, 1997 - ABDULIA RODRIGUEZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122932 June 17, 1997 - JOY BROTHERS, INC. v. NWPC

  • Adm. Case No. 4431 June 19, 1997 - PRISCILLA CASTILLO VDA. DE MIJARES v. ONOFRE A. VILLALUZ

  • Adm. Matter No. P-96-1221 June 19, 1997 - ADORACION G. ANGELES v. PABLO C. GERNALE, JR.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-97-1240 June 19, 1997 - WILFREDO C. BANOGON v. FELIPE T. ARIAS

  • Adm. Matter No. P-97-1242 June 19, 1997 - ESTHER P. MAGLEO v. ARISTON G. TAYAG

  • G.R. Nos. 93100 & 97855 June 19, 1997 - ATLAS FERTILIZER CORP. v. SECRETARY OF DAR

  • G.R. No. 102612 June 19, 1997 - MANUEL L. QUEZON UNIVERSITY, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 102723-24 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO CABALLES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 103493 June 19, 1997 - PHILSEC INVESTMENT CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106583 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICTORIANO CASTRO

  • G.R. No. 108107 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SUSAN PANTALEON

  • G.R. No. 108616 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO PATAWARAN

  • G.R. No. 109224 June 19, 1997 - MEGASCOPE GENERAL SERVICES v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110226 June 19, 1997 - ALBERTO S. SILVA, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112687 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ABNER B. EUBRA

  • G.R. No. 113685 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. THEODORE BERNAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 114812 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODEL Z. SAHAGUN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115968 June 19, 1997 - RUBIN FERRER, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116394 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEODORO BONOLA

  • G.R. No. 116918 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BONFILO MARTINEZ

  • G.R. No. 117005 June 19, 1997 - CARLITO D. CORPUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117228 June 19, 1997 - RODOLFO MORALES, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 118335-36 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSELLER ALAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119071 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGELIO ANTIPONA

  • G.R. No. 121429 June 19, 1997 - MARCIA TUMBIGA v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122368 June 19, 1997 - BERNARDO NAZAL, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122389 June 19, 1997 - MIGUEL SINGSON v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122806 June 19, 1997 - TIMES BROADCASTING NETWORK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122866 June 19, 1997 - MELVA NATH v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123073 June 19, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN CAYABYAB

  • G.R. No. 123673 June 19, 1997 - PEDRO C. CALUCAG v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 123708 June 19, 1997 - CSC, ET AL. v. RAFAEL M. SALAS

  • G.R. No. 124050 June 19, 1997 ccc zz

    MAYER STEEL PIPE CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125008 June 19, 1997 - COMMODITIES STORAGE & ICE PLANT CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125221 June 19, 1997 - REYNALDO M. LOZANO v. ELIEZER R. DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125347 June 19, 1997 - EMILIANO RILLO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125798 June 19, 1997 - HADJI HAMID LUMNA PATORAY v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125955 June 19, 1997 - WILMER GREGO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 126361 June 19, 1997 - VICTOR R. MIRANDA, ET AL. v. JESSIE B. CASTILLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127311 June 19, 1997 - CONRADO LINDO v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127623 June 19, 1997 - DOMINADOR VERGEL DE DIOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116216 June 20, 1997 - NATALIA S. MENDOZA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116695 June 20, 1997 - VICTORIA G. GACHON, ET AL. v. NORBERTO C. DEVERA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 118435 June 20, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO SERZO, JR.

  • G.R. No. 119178 June 20, 1997 - LINA LIM LAO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119745 June 20, 1997 - POWER COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 122079 June 27, 1997 - ANTONIO CONCEPCION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100935 June 30, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VICENTE ZABALLERO

  • G.R. No. 102316 June 30, 1997 - VALENZUELA HARDWOOD AND INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112260 June 30, 1997 - JOVITA YAP ANCOG, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115689 June 30, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LINO ARTIAGA

  • G.R. No. 121793 June 30, 1997 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ADONIS BALAD

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. 92462   June 2, 1997 - SANTIAGO GOKING v. ROLANDO R. VILLARAZA, ET AL.

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [G.R. No. 92462. June 2, 1997.]

    SANTIAGO GOKING, Petitioner, v. HON. ROLANDO R. VILLARAZA, as Presiding Judge of the RTC of Misamis Oriental, 10th Judicial Region, Br. 23, Cagayan de Oro City, PEOPLE’S TRANS-EAST ASIA INSURANCE CORP. and FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER CO. OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.


    D E C I S I O N


    HERMOSISIMA, JR., J.:


    To assail as tainted with grave abuse of discretion the Order 1 of Hon. Judge Rolando R. Villaraza which denied the Motion for Execution 2 filed by petitioner Santiago Goking on the ground that the prayer therein to collect from private respondent People’s Trans-East Asia Insurance Corporation (hereafter, "People’s"), the sum of P76,222.93 representing refund for premium payments, had neither factual nor legal basis, petitioner inevitably filed the herein petition for certiorari. The Decision 3 of the Regional Trial Court, 4 as modified by the Decision 5 of the Court of Appeals, 6 was then due for execution.chanroblesvirtual|awlibrary

    The following facts are not disputed:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    ". . . [S]ometime on March 18, 1982, [petitioner] mortgaged his property covered by TCT No. T-21615 to the [private respondent] Firestone to secure an obligation of Three G Distributors, Inc. with the latter company in the amount of P500,000.00 pursuant to an agreement previously entered into between Firestone on one hand and Three G and its directors (Santiago Goking, Rufino Inocian, Sulpicio Tancinco, and Pedro Guerzon) on the other. It was likewise agreed that plaintiff’s property would be released by Firestone upon the assumption by said directors in their personal capacity of the aforestated obligation of Three G and the submission of the required surety bonds.

    Pursuant thereto, [petitioner] entered into an indemnity agreement with Aggregated Underwriters Corporation, General Agent of [private respondent] People’s Trans-East Asia Insurance Corporation, through Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia Jr. for the issuance of surety bonds to the individual members of the Board of Directors of Three G in connection with their obligation to Firestone.

    The premiums for the surety bonds issued were paid by [petitioner] to [private respondent] People’s General Agent on January 21, 1983 in the total amount of P76,222.93 per receipt issued by Aggregated Underwriters Corporation.

    Thereafter, in spite of several demands, [private respondent] People’s failed and refused to honor the commitment and obligation entered into by it through its General Agent [and] to return the premiums paid. As a result, plaintiff’s mortgaged property was foreclosed by Firestone on August 7, 1984. . . .

    The case against Firestone was, however, dropped in view of an amicable settlement entered into with [petitioner] on August 17, 1987, leaving People’s Trans-East Asia Insurance Corporation as sole defendant. Said defendant, in its Answer, denies the authority of its General Agent, Aggregated Underwriter[s] Corporation, to enter into the indemnity agreement with [petitioner] . . . in spite of its admission and due execution of the Special Power of Attorney . . . authorizing Aggregated to conduct and transact insurance business as a General Agent of People’s. . . .

    x       x       x


    . . . [A]s a result of the refusal of defendant People’s to honor the indemnity agreement entered into by Aggregated Underwriters Corporation through Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia, Jr. with [petitioner] and to issue the necessary surety bonds, [petitioner] together with the other directors of Three G . . . filed a personal complaint against Roque Villadores and his companions with the Regional Trial Court of Misamis Oriental, Branch 22, Cagayan de Oro City, in Civil Case No. 9114, for a refund of the premiums paid in the amount of P76,222.93 plus damages.

    On October 19, 1984, a decision . . . was rendered in said [Civil Case No. 9114] in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants, in this wise:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    ‘WHEREFORE, considering all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants, ordering the latter to pay the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    1) P76,222.93 as refund for the premium;

    2) P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees;

    3) P3,000.00 as litigation expenses;

    4) P50,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages;

    5) The total amount of P134,222.93 shall earn interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of finality of this decision until fully paid.’

    There being no appeal in said [Civil Case No. 9114], the same became final and executory.

    On December 5, 1985, a decision was also rendered in the case at bar [i.e., Civil Case No. 9800], the dispositive portion of which reads:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    ‘WHEREFORE, considering all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiff [Santiago Goking] and against the defendant [People’s Trans-East Asia Insurance Corporation], ordering the latter to do the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    1) To issue approved surety bonds in compliance with the commitment of its authorized agent in case the premium in the amount of P76,222.93 is not yet refunded to the plaintiff;

    2) To pay the amount of P5,000.00 as litigation expenses and P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees;

    3) To pay solidarily with defendants in Civil Case No. 9114 the amounts in the decision for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses, moral and exemplary damages.

    SO ORDERED.’" 7

    While the decision of the trial court in Civil Case No. 9114 became final and executory, private respondent People’s appealed from the decision of the trial court in Civil Case No. 9800, to the Court of Appeals. Said appellate court, however, found no merit in the appeal, except that it deleted the portion of the trial court’s decision ordering "defendant to pay solidarily with defendants in Civil Case No. 9114 the amounts in the decision for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses plus moral and exemplary damages." 8chanroblesvirtual|awlibrary

    On December 12, 1988, petitioner filed with the Court of Appeals a Motion for Delineation, Definition and/or Enforcement of Decision and/or Motion for Reconsideration 9 praying for, among others, a modification of the Decision of the Court of Appeals to the effect that private respondent People’s be ordered to pay the amount of P76,222.93 as refund for the premiums payments plus interest of 12% until full reimbursement is made.

    On January 10, 1989, the Court of Appeals denied the aforedescribed Motion on the ground that the records having been remanded to the trial court for execution, said appellate court had already lost jurisdiction over the case and could not, thus, act on said Motion.

    On August 29, 1989, petitioner filed in the trial court a Motion for Execution in Civil Case No. 9800. In said Motion, petitioner reiterated its prayer for a modification of the order of the trial court "to issue approved surety bonds in compliance with the commitment of its authorized agent in case the premium in the amount of P76,222.93 is not yet refunded to the plaintiff" 10 and accordingly asked the trial court to instead order private respondent People’s to directly pay the said amount to petitioner as reimbursement for the premiums paid by petitioner, including legal interest of 12%.

    On August 29, 1989, petitioner filed in the trial court his Bill of Costs. 11

    On September 12, 1989, private respondent People’s filed an Opposition to Motion for Execution and to Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs. 12

    In a pleading denominated as Rejoinder to Opposition for Execution and to Plaintiff’s Bill of Costs 13 (which pleading should have been captioned as a Reply), petitioner reiterated its demand for the reimbursement of the premiums paid to private respondent People’s, plus legal interests. A Rejoinder thereto was filed subsequently by private respondent People’s.

    On December 4, 1989, respondent Judge Rolando R. Villaraza rendered the herein assailed Order in effect denying petitioner’s prayer for the trial court to order private respondent People’s to pay the amount of P76,222.93 to petitioner as reimbursement for the premiums paid by the latter to Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia, Jr., all of whom represented Aggregated Underwriters Corporation, which was the General Agent of private respondent People’s. The pertinent portion of the herein assailed Order reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "Admittedly, the decision was rendered by this Court on December 5, 1985, in favor of [petitioner], as follows —

    ‘WHEREFORE, considering all the foregoing, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiff [Santiago Goking] and against the defendant [People’s Trans-East Asia Insurance Corporation], ordering the latter to do the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    1) To issue approved surety bonds in compliance with the commitment of its authorized agent in case the premium in the amount of P76,222.93 is not yet refunded to the plaintiff;

    2) To pay the amount of P5,000.00 as litigation expenses and P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees;

    3) To pay solidarily with defendants in Civil Case No. 9114 the amounts in the decision for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses, moral and exemplary damages.cralawnadris

    SO ORDERED.’

    On appeal by defendants, the Court of Appeals modified the foregoing judgment in a decision promulgated on September 17, 1987, as follows —

    ‘WHEREFORE, with the exception of the order of the trial court to the defendant to pay solidarily with defendants in Civil Case No. 9114 the amounts in the decision for attorney’s fees and litigation expenses plus moral and exemplary damages, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed in all other respects. Appellee in Civil Case No. 9114 is not precluded from executing the decision in said case which is final and executory. Costs against appellants.’

    To have the final and executory judgment in this case which was modified, as desired by plaintiffs and to read — ‘1) P76,222.93 as refund for the premium plus legal interest of 12% per annum until fully reimbursed;’ would be improper if not illegal. A trial court cannot change, amplify, enlarge, alter or modify the decision of the [Court of Appeals], as held in the cases of Macapantao v. Guinoo, 13 SCRA 685; Mangayao v. De Guzman, 55 SCRA 540.

    x       x       x" 14

    On January 4, 1990, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the aforecited Order.

    On February 2, 1990, the trial court denied petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration and ordered the issuance of a writ of execution to satisfy the judgment of the trial court dated December 5, 1985 as modified by the decision on appeal dated September 17, 1987 rendered by the Court of Appeals.chanrobles.com : virtual lawlibrary

    Hence this petition.

    Considering the foregoing facts, we find no merit whatsoever in this petition.

    Petitioner’s insistence that private respondent People’s be ordered by the trial court to pay the amount P76,222.93, is fatally premised on his willful disregard of the fact that the Regional Trial Court of Misamis Oriental, Branch 22, in Civil Case No. 9114, had already ordered therein defendants — Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia, Jr. — to pay petitioner the amount of P76,222.93 as refund for the premiums paid by petitioner as well as the several amounts of P5,000.00 as attorney’s fees, P3,000.00 as litigation expenses, and P50,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages.

    The decision of the trial court in Civil Case No. 9114 was not appealed; hence, it had long become final and executory. In order to retrieve the premiums paid by petitioner, he should have moved for the execution of the final and executory decision in Civil Case No. 9114 which directly ordered therein defendants — Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia, Jr. — to pay petitioner the amount of P76,222.93 as reimbursement for the premium payments.

    We cannot determine from the records of the instant case whether or not petitioner moved for the issuance of, and was granted, a writ of execution in Civil Case No. 9114. If petitioner did so and forthwith obtained satisfaction of the final and executory judgment in Civil Case No. 9114, then he must have already received the premium refund to which he is absolutely entitled under the judgment in Civil Case No. 9114. But, if petitioner, for any reason, failed to file a motion for the issuance of a writ of execution in said case, he cannot subsequently insist on being paid the same premium refund in this other case, namely, Civil Case No. 9800, which decision does not order private respondent People’s to pay the premium refund but rather orders said private respondent "to issue approved surety bonds in compliance with the commitment of its authorized agent in case the premium in the amount of P76,222.93 is not yet refunded to the [petitioner]" 15 by the defendants in Civil Case No. 9114.

    Petitioner stubbornly argues that the trial court, in rejecting his prayer for private respondent People’s to be ordered to pay him the premium refund, disregarded the principle against unjust enrichment and thus committed grave abuse of discretion. What rather strikes us, however, is that petitioner simply refuses to accept the plain reality that he is seeking remedy from the wrong court. Petitioner’s correct recourse lies in the execution of the final and executory judgment in Civil Case No. 9114 which explicitly ordered the refund of the premiums that petitioner had paid to therein defendants — Roque Villadores, Rodolfo Esculto and Federico Garcia, Jr. — who represented themselves as agents of private respondent People’s. We thus find respondent judge to have rendered the herein assailed Order in accordance with prevailing law and jurisprudence. Verily, petitioner must now accept the futility of his impassioned attempt to substantially modify the dispositive portion of the final and executory judgment in Civil Case No. 9800 in order to obtain in this case the premium refund awarded to him in another case, namely, Civil Case No. 9114.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

    WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the instant petition is HEREBY DISMISSED.

    Costs against petitioner.

    SO ORDERED.

    Bellosillo, Vitug and Kapunan, JJ., concur.

    Padilla, J., is on leave.

    Endnotes:



    1. Issued in Civil Case No. 9800, dated December 4, 1989; Rollo, pp. 149-150.

    2. Dated August 29, 1989, Rollo, pp. 127-129.

    3. In Civil Case No. 9800, dated December 5, 1985, penned by Judge Leonardo N. Demecillo; Rollo, pp. 51-67.

    4. RTC of Misamis Oriental, Branch XXIII, 10th Judicial Region, Cagayan de Oro City.

    5. In CA-G.R. CV No. 08475, promulgated on September 17, 1987, penned by Associate Justice Rodolfo A. Nocon and concurred in by Associate Justices Ricardo P. Tensuan and Felipe B. Kalalo; Rollo, pp. 116-122.

    6. Third Division.

    7. Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 08475, pp. 1-3; Rollo, pp. 116-118.

    8. Id., p. 6; Rollo, p. 121.

    9. Rollo, pp. 123-125.

    10. Decision of the RTC in Civil Case No. 9800 dated December 5, 1985, p. 17; Rollo, p. 67.

    11. Rollo, pp. 130-133.

    12. Rollo, pp. 134-136.

    13. Dated October 6, 1989, Rollo, pp. 137-144.

    14. Order of the Regional Trial Court in Civil Case No. 9800, dated December 4, 1989, pp. 1-2; Rollo, pp. 149-150.

    15. Decision in Civil Case No. 9800, p. 17; Rollo, p. 67.

    G.R. No. 92462   June 2, 1997 - SANTIAGO GOKING v. ROLANDO R. VILLARAZA, ET AL.


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED