ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[A.M. OCA IPI No. 03-1422-MTJ. January 19, 2005]

IBALE vs. LUCMAYON

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 19 2005 .

Adm. Matter OCA IPI No. 03-1422-MTJ (Mr. and Mrs.Crispino Ibale, Jr., et al. vs. Judge Rogelio S. Lucmayon and Israel R. Sanchez, Clerk of Court III, MTCC, Branch 1, Mandaue City.)

This treats of the Report dated 28 October 2004 on the administrative matter submitted to the Court by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).

In a verified Complaint dated 20 May 2003, Mr. and Mrs. Crispino Ibale, Jr., Mr. and Mrs. Joel Ibale, and Mr. and Mrs. Roger Oyua charge respondent Judge Rogelio S. Lucmayon of the Municipal Trial Court of Mandaue City (MTCC), Br. 1, with Oppression, Conduct Unbecoming of a Judge, and Ignorance of the Law. They also charge respondent Israel R. Sanchez, Clerk of Court III of the same court, with Abuse of Authority. The charges arose from Civil Case No. 3785 entitled "James Alekhina Tan, et al. v. Mr. and Mrs. Rolito and Genel Ibale, et al." for Forcible Entry with Preliminary Mandatory Injunction. Complainants allege that on 29 April 2003 they were served with summons directing them to answer the complaint in said civil case even though their names were not included as defendants. They said that prior to 29 April 2003 , plaintiffs-applicants in the said case never filed any case against them regarding their stay on the subject property. Complainants also claimed that they inherited the subject lot from their grandmother in 1990.

In their Joint Comment dated 30 July 2003, respondents claim that Civil Case No. 3785 was decided on 6 March 2002 in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants therein. The decision became final and executory, no appeal having been interposed within the fifteen (15)-day reglementary period. The plaintiffs filed a Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution and Writ of Demolition dated 16 April 2002. The MTCC granted only the issuance of the Writ of Execution in an order dated 7 May 2002. As a consequence, a Notice to Vacate dated 21 May 2002 was served upon the defendants. The defendants filed a Petition for Prohibition and Certiorari against herein respondent Judge Lucmayon before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaue City. The RTC denied the petition on 11 June 2002 and defendants' Motion for Reconsideration on 24 October 2002 . The questioned decision having become final, plaintiffs then filed a Motion for Hearing on Writ of Demolition. On 6 January 2003 , the Writ of Demolition was granted. The demolition, however, could not be carried out because new or additional occupants, herein complainants (purportedly relatives of defendants) entered the litigated property with the consent of defendants and occupied the same. Counsel for plaintiffs filed a motion to summon additional occupants (referring to herein complainants who allegedly entered the subject property after the decision in the civil case was rendered) to explain why they should not be bound by the writ of demolition issued against the defendants. In an Order dated 4 April 2004, the trial court granted the motion to summon additional defendants after finding the same to be in order, and pursuant to this, respondent Sanchez, as Clerk of Court, sent summons to the new occupants, herein complainants, attaching copies of the complaint and the court order. Respondents contend that complainants, as the new occupants of the subject property, had been properly impleaded in the 4 April 2004 Order and the complaint and annexes to the summons were sufficient to inform the complainants about the case. They maintain that their acts are within the ambit of law and in accordance with the Rules of Court. Counsel for complainants is also the counsel for defendants in the civil case; hence, he should have informed complainants of their role in the civil case.

In its Report dated 28 October 2004, the OCA found the charges against respondents bereft of merit. When respondent Judge Lucmayon granted the motion to summon complainants, he was found to be merely observing due process by affording complainants the opportunity to be heard before the writ of demolition was actually implemented. The Order dated 4 April 2004 was issued in the exercise of Judge Lucmayon's judicial discretion and there was no evidence to show that the issuance was actuated by bad faith. Respondent Israel should also not be faulted for having issued the summons since he was merely obeying the orders issued by the court. Hence, the OCA recommends that the charges against respondents be dismissed for lack of merit.

Finding the recommendation to be in accordance with the law and the facts of the case on record, the same is APPROVED. The administrative complaint against Judge Rogelio S. Lucmayon and Israel R. Sanchez, Clerk of Court III, MTCC, Branch 1, Mandaue City, is DISMISSED for lack of merit.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE