August 2010 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2010 > August 2010 Resolutions >
[G.R. No. 187346 : August 04, 2010] SPOUSES MACARIO E. MELECIO AND MARIA ELSA MELECIO V. AVELINO MALCAMPO :
[G.R. No. 187346 : August 04, 2010]
SPOUSES MACARIO E. MELECIO AND MARIA ELSA MELECIO V. AVELINO MALCAMPO
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 04 August 2010 which reads as follows:
G.R. No. 187346 (Spouses Macario E. Melecio and Maria Elsa Melecio v. Avelino Malcampo) - The instant petition stemmed from a default judgment rendered by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 34, Panabo City, against petitioners (defendants therein) which was appealed to the Court of Appeals (Mindanao Station, Cagayan de Oro City).
In a Resolution[1] promulgated on October 17, 2008, the CA dismissed the appeal on the ground that (1) no proof of service of Appellants' Brief and (2) explanation why service was not made personally, were filed by Defendant-Appellants. The subsequent motion for reconsideration thereof was, likewise, denied in the Resolution[2] dated February 20, 2009; hence the instant petition assailing the twin resolutions of the CA.
It must be stressed that dismissal of appeals purely on technical grounds is frowned upon and rules of procedure ought not to be applied in a very rigid, technical sense, for they are adopted to help secure, not override substantial justice.[3] We note that two (2) Justices[4] belonging to the 23rd Division of the CA expressed their dissent, saying that the dismissal of the appeal based on formal defects that can be rectified would be too harsh in this case.[5] Moreover, a perusal of the records reveals that the judgment by default may amount to considerable injustice to petitioners considering that they are on the verge of losing their property after investing a substantial amount, about P1.2 Million, in the development adn cultivation of Cavendish bananas in the subject land located in Sto. Tomas, Davao del Norte.
Thus, in the interest of justice, the Court Resolved to REMAND the case to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals is DIRECTED to PROCEED with petitioners' appeal with dispatch.
The Compliance with Explanation and Comment dated June 18, 2010, filed by counsel for respondent are NOTED.
G.R. No. 187346 (Spouses Macario E. Melecio and Maria Elsa Melecio v. Avelino Malcampo) - The instant petition stemmed from a default judgment rendered by the Regional Trial Court, Branch 34, Panabo City, against petitioners (defendants therein) which was appealed to the Court of Appeals (Mindanao Station, Cagayan de Oro City).
In a Resolution[1] promulgated on October 17, 2008, the CA dismissed the appeal on the ground that (1) no proof of service of Appellants' Brief and (2) explanation why service was not made personally, were filed by Defendant-Appellants. The subsequent motion for reconsideration thereof was, likewise, denied in the Resolution[2] dated February 20, 2009; hence the instant petition assailing the twin resolutions of the CA.
It must be stressed that dismissal of appeals purely on technical grounds is frowned upon and rules of procedure ought not to be applied in a very rigid, technical sense, for they are adopted to help secure, not override substantial justice.[3] We note that two (2) Justices[4] belonging to the 23rd Division of the CA expressed their dissent, saying that the dismissal of the appeal based on formal defects that can be rectified would be too harsh in this case.[5] Moreover, a perusal of the records reveals that the judgment by default may amount to considerable injustice to petitioners considering that they are on the verge of losing their property after investing a substantial amount, about P1.2 Million, in the development adn cultivation of Cavendish bananas in the subject land located in Sto. Tomas, Davao del Norte.
Thus, in the interest of justice, the Court Resolved to REMAND the case to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals is DIRECTED to PROCEED with petitioners' appeal with dispatch.
The Compliance with Explanation and Comment dated June 18, 2010, filed by counsel for respondent are NOTED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) MA. LUISA L. LAUREA
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Special Division of Five, Mindanao Station, Cagayan de Oro City, penned by Associate Justice Rodrigo F. Lim, Jr., with Associate Justices Romulo V. Borja and Michael P. Elbinias, concurring; and Associate Justices Ruben C. Ayson and Edgardo T. Lloren, dissenting; Rollo, pp. 9-11.
[2] Id. at 13-15.
[3] Paredes v. Verano, G.R. No. 164375, October 12, 2006; 504 SCRA 264.
[4] Associate Justices Ruben C. Ayson and Edgardo T. Lloren.
[5] Rollo, p. 12.