Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2008 > June 2008 Resolutions > [G.R. No. 156132 : June 18, 2008] CITIBANK, N.A. AND FNCB FINANCE V. MODESTA R. SABENIANO :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 18 June 2008:

G.R. No. 156132 (CITIBANK, N.A. and FNCB FINANCE v. MODESTA R. SABENIANO)



On 2 April 2008, the Court resolved to

(1)	INFORM petitioners that the records of the case had already been remanded to the Court of Appeals for the latter to return the same to the RTC for execution of the Decision dated 16 October 2006;
(2)	DIRECT:
	(a)	petitioners to retrieve, as soon as possible, Manager's Check No. 60416512 and 60424669 from the cashier's office of this Court and, instead, tender its payment before the lower court; and
	(b)	the Cashier's Office, this Court, to immediately release said checks to petitioners.

Upon receipts of the said Resolution, petitioners filed a Motion for Clarification, bearing the following prayer:

WHEREFORE, petitioners respectfully pray that this Honorable Court issue a resolution clarifying the consequences and/or implications of its new instructions under its Resolution dated 2 April 2008 and confirming the following:

(i)	Petitioners had already voluntarily satisfied all their liabilities under the 16 October 2006 Decision upon the consignation of the MC No. 60416512 with this Honorable Court on 31 August 2007;
(ii)	Upon retrieval by petitioners of MC Nos. 60416512 and 60424669 from this Honorable Court's Cashier's Office, interest will not commence to run anew;
(iii)	After retrieval by petitioners of MC Nos. 60416512 and 60424669 petitioners should directly tender/consign MC No. 60424669 with the Regional Trial Court; and
(iv)	Upon the consignation of MC No. 60424669 with the Regional Trial Court, petitioners will be discharged from any and all liabilities under the 16 October 2006 Decision.

 
Petitioners aver that without this Court's clarification/confirmation of the aforesaid details, respondent will most likely take advantage of the possible ambiguities arising from, and will instigate further litigation on, the "meaning" of the Court's latest directives. Otherwise stated, petitioners assert that without the clarification/confirmation prayed for, the present controversy will never come to an end.

Given that this case has been pending before the courts for a total of 23 years, the most prudent course of action would be for this Court to provide the clarification sought by petitioners and to stale, in categorical terms, the implications of the directives in its 2 April 2008 Resolution, if only to prevent any of the parties, or even the Regional Trial Court tasked with the execution of the Court's final judgment, from misconstruing the true intent of said Resolution, and further prolonging the proceedings.

At the outset, the Court elucidates that it issued the 2 April 2008 Resolution in accordance with the basic rule of procedure, espoused in Section 1, Rule 39 of the Revised Rules of Court, that execution of judgment shall be carried out by the court of origin.  Which, in the present case, is the Regional Trial Court, Branch 140, of Makati City. Hence, the records of the case were remanded to the Court of Appeals' for remanding, in turn, to the Regional Trial Court.

Moreover, this Court must not be burdened by the complexities arising from the continued refusal by respondent to obey this Court's directive in its 4 February 2008 Resolution that she pick up the Manager's Check consigned by petitioners; respondent's multifarious filings; and the foreseeable repeated filing by petitioners of manifestations to replace their consigned Manager's Check to prevent the same from becoming stale.

Accordingly, this Court confirms that:

(i)	As acknowledged in this Court's 4 February 2008 Resolution, petitioners had already voluntarily satisfied all their liabilities under the 16 October 2006 Decision upon the consignation of the original Manager's Check No 60416512 with this Court on 31 August 2007 and, thus, were already discharged from any and all liabilities under the 16 October 2006 Decision; and
(ii)	As petitioners had already settled all their liabilities under the 16 October 2006 Decision and had already been discharged, petitioners cannot be assessed any additional amount arising from said Decision and, hence, interest will not commence to run anew when petitioners retrieve replacement Manager's Check No 6042466 from the Cashiers Office of this Court until its consignment with the Regional Trial Court.

It is hoped that, with this clarification, the Court has written finis to this long-drawn battle.

WHEREFORE, the Court resolves to:

1. DIRECT petitioners to retrieve Manager's Checks No. 60416512 and No. 60424669 from the Cashier's Office of this Court within ten (10) days from receipt hereof as stated in our Resolution dated 2 April 2008,
   
   
2. DIRECT petitioners to directly consign Manager's Check. No. 60424669 with the Regional Trial Court where the case was originally filed and tried, on the same day they retrieve the said check from the Cashier's Office of this Court, and to submit to this Court the necessary report showing compliance with this directive. Thereafter, petitioners are deemed discharged from any and all liabilities under me 16 October 2006 Decision;
   
   
3. DIRECT the Regional Trial Court to receive Manager's Check No. 60424669 consigned by petitioners and promptly issue a notice to respondent of the said consignation, and
   
   
4. DIRECT respondent to pick up Managers Chock No. 60424669 within ten (10) days from receipt of notice from the Regional Trial Court of the check's consignation therewith.
   

SO ORDERED.