Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1953 > May 1953 Decisions > G.R. No. L-5292 May 13, 1953 - PELAGIA ARANTE v. ARCADIO ROSEL

093 Phil 18:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-5292. May 13, 1953.]

PELAGIA ARANTE, ETC., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. ARCADIO ROSEL, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Jorge B. Delgado for Appellants.

Marcelino R. Veloso for Appellees.


SYLLABUS


1. PLEADING AND PRACTICE; RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT, ORDER, ETC. UNDER RULE 38. — R filed a petition for relief under Rule 38 to set aside all proceedings leading to sale on execution of property allegedly his. Held: Inasmuch as he had already filed an action against the sheriff and other parties to recover the property and/or damages, the relief should be denied.

2. ID.; ID.; AN EXCEPTIONAL REMEDY. — Relief under Rule 38 is an exceptional remedy to be extended only when there is no other available remedy.


D E C I S I O N


BENGZON, J.:


In this forcible entry and detainer case, the Court of First Instance of Leyte confirmed the judgment of the justice of the peace of the town of Leyte, same province, ejecting the defendants from the land in contestation. Pursuant to a writ of execution, the sheriff placed the plaintiffs in possession. However, to satisfy the award of damages and costs that officer seized another piece of land described in tax declaration No. 5467 in the name of defendant Esteban Rosel; and the notice of sale at public auction of said property was published in The Midweek Reporter on September 14, 21, and 28, 1949, respectively. Notice was also posted in the municipality of Leyte (where the land was situated) and in Tacloban, the capital of Leyte, where the property was struck down, on September 30, 1949, to the highest bidder, who turned out to be the plaintiff Pelagia Arante, her offer for the land being P352.10.

No one having volunteered to redeem the property, the provincial sheriff executed, on October 10, 1950, the corresponding certificate of final sale.

On January 10, 1951, Esteban Rosel filed a "Petition for relief" requesting that all the proceedings taken by the provincial sheriff be set aside on account of the following irregularities: (a) No notices were posted in three public places in Leyte, Leyte, and in Tacloban, the capital; and (b) although the assessed value of the property was P1,010 publication was not made "in a newspaper published or having general circulation in the province" once a week for twenty days before the sale.

Favourably impressed by petitioner’s allegations, the district judge annulled the sale in an order dated March 13, 1951. But on March 30, 1951, the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration, maintaining that the regulations about publication had been duly observed, and that the petition for relief was not allowable under Rule 38 of the Rules of Court.

Opposing the move, the defendants submitted a memorandum, reiterating the insufficiency of the notices and interposing other objections to the sale, namely: (1) the public auction took place in Tacloban, instead of the town of Leyte; (2) the price of the sale was shockingly inadequate, the value of the lot being P5,000; and (3) collusion between the sheriff and the plaintiffs.

The matter came up before another judge, who, having found there was adequate notice of the sale revoked the court’s previous order of March 13, 1951. Said judge explained furthermore that the petition should be denied, first because it did not fall within the purview of Rule 38, relief being sought from acts of the sheriff, and not from orders of the Court; and second, because the defendants had already commenced a separate civil action against the plaintiffs (and the sheriff) to avoid the sale and to recover the same parcel of land.

Hence this appeal.

We have held that appeals are available against orders denying relief under Rule 38, which appellant Rosel has specifically invoked, in the discussion of his several assignments of error. However, in the light of appellees’ explanations, we do not feel inclined to override the discretion which the Rule confers upon the trial judge.

One particular point is conclusive. "The relief provided for by this rule (38) is of exceptional character and is allowed only in exceptional cases: where there is no other available remedy. 1

It appears that even before submitting the petition for relief, Esteban Rosel and his wife had already filed on November 14, 1950, a complaint against the herein plaintiffs and the provincial sheriff (Exhibit 3, civil case No. 576) alleging illegality of the auction sale of the same property, confabulation among the said defendants and damages to the Rosel spouses, and praying for annulment of such sale, restoration of the property and ample monetary compensation.

If they can prove their assertions of collusion and illegality of the public auction, the Rosels would undoubtedly be given suitable awards in that civil case No. 576. Consequently, the trial judge acted correctly in refusing to extend relief under Rule 38, for the reason that petitioners had another remedy: the civil action. (See Rule 39, sec. 17, Rules of Court.)

Wherefore, this appeal being unmeritorious, the disputed order is affirmed, with costs. So ordered.

Paras, C.J., Feria, Pablo, Tuason, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Moran, Comments, 1952 Ed. Vol. I, p. 784 citing Palomares, Et. Al. v. Jimenez, L-4513, January 31, 1952.




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






May-1953 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-5078 May 4, 1953 - LUIS FRANCISCO v. MAXIMA VDA. DE BLAS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-5195 May 4, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NAPOLEON LIBRE, ET AL.

    093 Phil 5

  • G.R. No. L-3772 May 13, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAUTI LINGCUAN, ET AL.

    093 Phil 9

  • G.R. No. L-5217 May 13, 1953 - VICENTE VILORIA v. ISIDORO VILORIA

    093 Phil 15

  • G.R. No. L-5292 May 13, 1953 - PELAGIA ARANTE v. ARCADIO ROSEL

    093 Phil 18

  • G.R. No. L-5331 May 13, 1953 - NG YOUNG v. ANA VILLA

    093 Phil 21

  • G.R. No. L-4258 May 15, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO FRANCISCO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 28

  • G.R. No. L-4716 May 15, 1953 - FELICISIMA DAPITON v. NICOLAS VELOSO

    093 Phil 39

  • G.R. No. L-4847 May 15, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MOROS ANSANG

    093 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. L-5089 May 15, 1953 - JUAN MORTOS v. VICTOR ELLO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. L-5117 May 15, 1953 - IN RE: FRANCISCO ANG VELOSO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-5529 May 15, 1953 - FORTUNATA RAMENTO, ET AL. v. GUADALUPE COSUANGCO

    093 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. L-5594 May 15, 1953 - ATOK-BIG WEDGE MINING CO., INC. v. ATOK-BIG WEDGE MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOC.

    093 Phil 62

  • G.R. No. L-6165 May 15, 1953 - ISABELO CENTENO, v. DOLORES GALLARDO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 63

  • G.R. No. L-3708 May 18, 1953 - ROYAL L. RUTTER v. PLACIDO J. ESTEBAN

    093 Phil 68

  • G.R. No. L-4880 May 18, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUTIQUIANO DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. L-4565 May 20, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. APOLONIO RAIZ

    093 Phil 94

  • G.R. No. L-5963 May 20, 1953 - LEYTE-SAMAR SALES CO., ET AL. v. SULPICIO V. CEA, ET AL.

    093 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. L-4376 May 22, 1953 - ASSOCIATION OF CUSTOMS BROKERS, INC. v. MUNICIPAL BOARD, ET AL.

    093 Phil 107

  • G.R. No. L-4572 May 22, 1953 - DOLORITO M. FELICIANO, ET AL. v. DIRECTOR OF PATENTS

    093 Phil 113

  • G.R. No. L-5029 May 22, 1953 - IN RE: CHUA TIONG CHIA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 117

  • G.R. No. L-5829 May 22, 1953 - JOSE NONO v. RUPERTO NEQUIA y OTROS

    093 Phil 120

  • G.R. Nos. L-4517-20 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GODOFREDO ROMERO

    093 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. L-4628 May 25, 1953 - VICENTE M. JOVEN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    093 Phil 134

  • G.R. No. L-4641 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs.PEDRO JIMENEZ, ET AL.

    093 Phil 137

  • G.R. No. L-4888 May 25, 1953 - JOSE MERZA v. PEDRO LOPEZ PORRAS

    093 Phil 142

  • G.R. No. L-5086 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VENTURA LANAS

    093 Phil 147

  • G.R. No. L-5236 May 25, 1953 - JOSE TORRES v. HERMENEGILDA SICAT VDA. DE MORALES

    093 Phil 155

  • G.R. No. L-5677 May 25, 1953 - LA CAMPANA COFFEE FACTORY, INC., ET AL. v. KAISAHAN NG MANGGAGAWA SA LA CAMPANA, ET AL.

    093 Phil 160

  • G.R. No. L-6108 May 25, 1953 - FRANCISCO DE BORJA, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO TAN, ET AL.

    093 Phil 167

  • G.R. No. L-6528 May 25, 1953 - MUNICIPALITY OF BOCAUE, ET AL. v. SEVERINO MANOTOK, ET AL.

    093 Phil 173

  • G.R. No. L-4478 May 27, 1953 - VICENTE DY SUN v. RICARDO BRILLANTES, ET AL.

    093 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. L-5127 May 27, 1953 - PEDRO BATUNGBAKAL v. NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL.

    093 Phil 182

  • G.R. No. L-5145 May 27, 1953 - FRANCISCO BASTIDA, ET AL. v. DY BUNCIO & CO. INC.

    093 Phil 195

  • G.R. Nos. L-5363 & L-5364 May 27, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DAIWAN LUCAS

    093 Phil 203

  • G.R. No. L-5554 May 27, 1953 - BENITO CHUA KUY v. EVERRETT STEAMSHIP CORPORATION

    093 Phil 207

  • G.R. No. L-4177 May 29, 1953 - IN RE: YAP CHIN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 215

  • G.R. No. L-4433 May 29, 1953 - SALUD PATENTE v. ROMAN OMEGA

    093 Phil 218

  • G.R. No. L-4629 May 29, 1953 - JUAN D. SALVADOR, ET AL. v. GUILLERMO LOCSIN

    093 Phil 225

  • G.R. No. L-4645 May 29, 1953 - LORENZO GAUIRAN v. RUFINO SAHAGUN

    093 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. L-5184 May 29, 1953 - MACONDRAY & CO. v. CONNECTICUT FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD

    093 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. L-5282 May 29, 1953 - GERONIMO DE LOS REYES v. ARTEMIO ELEPAÑO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. L-5296 May 29, 1953 - GREGORIO ENRIQUEZ v. DONATO PEREZ

    093 Phil 246

  • G.R. No. L-5345 May 29, 1953 - COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FINANCE CORP. v. EUTIQUIANO GARCIA

    093 Phil 250

  • G.R. No. L-5406 May 29, 1953 - TALISAY-SILAY MILLING CO. v. TALISAY EMPLOYEES AND LABORERS’ UNION

    093 Phil 251

  • G.R. Nos. L-5426-28 May 29, 1953 - RAMON JOAQUIN v. ANTONIO C. NAVARRO

    093 Phil 257

  • G.R. No. L-5535 May 29, 1953 - U. S. COMMERCIAL CO. v. FORTUNATO F. HALILI

    093 Phil 271

  • G.R. No. L-5567 May 29, 1953 - JUAN EVANGELISTA v. GUILLERMO MONTAÑO

    093 Phil 275

  • G.R. No. L-5601 May 29, 1953 - LEON VELEZ v. VICENTE VARELA

    093 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. L-5640 May 29, 1953 - ESTEBAN G. LAPID v. GUILLERMO CABRERA, ETC., ET AL.

    093 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. L-5783 May 29, 1953 - MANILA TRADING & SUPPLY CO. v. MANILA TRADING LABOR ASSOCIATION

    093 Phil 288

  • Adm. Case No. 72 May 30, 1953 - PLACIDO MANALO v. PEDRO N. GAN

    093 Phil 292

  • G.R. No. L-4758 May 30, 1953 - CALTEX [PHIL. ] INC. v. PHILIPPINE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

    093 Phil 295

  • G.R. No. L-4887 May 30, 1953 - UY MATIAO & CO., INC. v. CITY OF CEBU, ET AL.

    093 Phil 300

  • G.R. No. L-5301 May 30, 1953 - LOURDES T. PAGUIO v. MARIA ROSADO DE RUIZ

    093 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. L-6121 May 30, 1953 - MANUEL S. GAMALINDA v. JOSE V. YAP

    093 Phil 310