Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1982 > May 1982 Decisions > G.R. No. L-47334 May 31, 1982 - MIGUEL VIOLAGO, ET AL. v. JOSE C. CAMPOS, JR., ET AL.

199 Phil. 463:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-47334. May 31, 1982.]

MIGUEL VIOLAGO and SIMEON SINGALAWA, Petitioners, v. HON. PRESIDING JUDGE JOSE C. CAMPOS, JR., BRANCH XXX, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL and DALISAY T. ALDOVER. respondents.

Abraham P.A. Gorospe, for Petitioners.

Fidel M. Cabrera II for Respondents.

Conrado R. Mangahas for Times Surety.

SYNOPSIS


Private respondent filed an action for damages against petitioners and Times Security and Insurance Co., Inc. An answer with compulsory counterclaim was filed within the reglementary period. Two days before the scheduled hearing of August 12, 1977, counsel for petitioners entered his appearance and prayed for the postponement and resetting of trial. When petitioners and their counsel did not appear during the August 12, hearing, they were declared in default. Their motion for reconsideration was denied. Hence, the present petition.

On certiorari, the Supreme Court held that dependants who fail to appear at the trial who have filed their answer within the reglementary period cannot be declared in default, although trial may proceed without them.

Assailed orders set aside, and the case ordered set for hearing.


SYLLABUS


REMEDIAL LAW; CIVIL PROCEDURE; DEFAULT; FAILURE TO APPEAR AT TRIAL AFTER HAVING FILED ANSWER WITHIN THE REGLEMENTARY PERIOD DOES NOT CONSTITUTE DEFAULT. — Petitioners (dependants in Civil Case No. 5549-P) were not really in default because they have filed their answered to the complaint within the reglementary period. Having answered the complaint, the failure of the dependants to attend the court and to adduce evidence did not constitute default. Trial may proceed without them. (GO CHANGJO v. ROLDAN SY-CHANGJO, 18 Phil. 405).


D E C I S I O N


RELOVA, J.:


Dalisay T. Aldover filed an action against Miguel Violago, Simeon Singalawa and Times Surety and Insurance Company, Inc. for damages before the Court of First Instance of Rizal, in Pasay City. The case is docketed as Civil Case No. 5549-P and assigned to respondent Judge.

The defendants filed their answer with compulsory counterclaim within the reglementary period. Pre-trial was held on July 20, 1977 following which respondent Judge issued an Order setting the case for trial on the merits on August 12, 1977, at 9:00 in the morning.chanrobles law library

On August 10, 1977, Atty. Abraham P.A. Gorospe filed his appearance for defendants Violago and Singalawa, with prayer that the hearing on August 12, 1977 be postponed and reset for September 12 or 16, 1977 at 10:00 in the morning.

When the case was called for hearing on August 12, 1977, defendants Violago and Singalawa and their new counsel failed to appear. Upon plaintiff’s motion, respondent Judge declared them in default. Defendants Violago and Singalawa filed a motion for reconsideration but the same was denied. Hence, this petition for certiorari, praying that the Order of default (Annex "C"), "be annulled or set aside, and the Order denying the motion for reconsideration (Annex `F’) dated October 20, 1977 be reversed."cralaw virtua1aw library

Verification of the records of Civil Case No. 5549-P, entitled "Dalisay T. Aldover v. Miguel Violago, Simeon Singalawa and Times Surety and Insurance Company, Inc." for damages shows that said case is still pending trial before the Court of First Instance of Rizal in Pasay City, Branch XXX, with respect to defendants Miguel Violago and Simeon Singalawa, while the case against defendant Times Surety and Insurance Company, Inc. was terminated by virtue of a compromise agreement which was approved on February 19, 1979.

From the facts stated above, herein petitioners (defendants in said Civil Case No. 5549-P) were not really in default because they have filed their answer to the complaint within the statutory period. Having answered the complaint, the failure of defendants to attend the court and to adduce evidence did not constitute default. Trial may proceed without them. (Go Changjo v. Roldan Sy-Changjo, 18 Phil. 405)

"As long as the defendant answers he can never be in default and he should therefore not be declared in default (See Rosario Et. Al. v. Alonzo Et. Al. L-17330, June 29, 1963).

"As long as there has been an answer made by him, the mere non-appearance of the defendant at a hearing is not default, neither is failure to introduce evidence (Siojo v. Tecson, 88 Phil. 531; Ignacio v. Racho and Dolores, 78 Phil 557), BUT, certainly, the trial can proceed without him (Go Changjo v. Roldan Sy-Changjo, 18 Phil 405)."cralaw virtua1aw library

From the foregoing, we conclude that herein petitioners had been unjustly deprived of their day in court.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

WHEREFORE, the default order dated August 12, 1977 of respondent Judge in Civil Case No. 5549-P as well as the order denying the motion for reconsideration dated October 20, 1977 are hereby set aside and respondent is hereby directed to set the case for hearing with respect to defendants Miguel Violago and Simeon Singalawa and to render judgment accordingly.

SO ORDERED.

Teehankee (Chairman), Makasiar, Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Vasquez and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ., concur.




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-1982 Jurisprudence                 

  • Adm. Matter No. 2668-MJ May 22, 1982 - MARIANO B. LAUREL v. HERMENEGILDO C. CRUZ

    4199 Phil. 243

  • G.R. No. L-28245 May 22, 1982 - PHILIPPINE AMERICAN GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 245

  • G.R. No. L-29555 May 22, 1982 - ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. REPARATIONS COMMISSION

    199 Phil. 256

  • G.R. No. L-29917 May 22, 1982 - FOREMOST ENTERPRISES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 264

  • G.R. Nos. L-48376-85 May 22, 1982 - BALAGTAS REALTY CORPORATION v. MANUEL V. ROMILLO, JR., ET AL.

    199 Phil. 267

  • G.R. No. L-54887 May 22, 1982 - GUILLERMA FLORDELIS, ET AL. v. FERMIN MAR, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 281

  • G.R. No. L-57535 May 24, 1982 - ZENITH INSURANCE CORPORATION v. FIDEL P. PURISIMA, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 291

  • Adm. Case No. 133-J May 31, 1982 - BERNARDITA R. MACARIOLA v. ELIAS B. ASUNCION

    199 Phil. 295

  • Adm. Case No. 797 May 31, 1982 - LYDIA CABATU v. EDGARDO C. DOMINGO

    199 Phil. 324

  • Adm. Matter No. 2180-MJ May 31, 1982 - EPHRAIM MARIANO, ET AL. v. CRISOSTOMO GONZALES

    199 Phil. 326

  • Adm. Matter No. 2240-MJ May 31, 1982 - COSME S. ABIOG, ET AL. v. JOSE M. PASCUAL

  • G.R. No. L-25271 May 31, 1982 - REPARATIONS COMMISSION v. GUILLERMO SANTOS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 339

  • G.R. No. L-30028 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRESENCIO DOBLE, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 343

  • G.R. No. 31255 May 31, 1982 - MARCIAL A. EDILLON v. PIO B. FERANDOS

    199 Phil. 363

  • G.R. No. L-32734 May 31, 1982 - IN RE: CHUA TIONG KANG, ET AL. v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    199 Phil. 366

  • G.R. No. L-33209 May 31, 1982 - JESUSA DEL ROSARIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 367

  • G.R. No. L-33794 May 31, 1982 - MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 381

  • G.R. No. L-35105 May 31, 1982 - BALIUAG ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY, INC. v. JUAN F. ECHIVERI

    199 Phil. 393

  • G.R. No. L-35136 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMADO MONSALUD

    199 Phil. 398

  • G.R. No. L-36754 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYNALDO ABAYON, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 404

  • G.R. No. L-37074 May 31, 1982 - IN RE: BENITO LEE v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    199 Phil. 436

  • G.R. No. L-37243 May 31, 1982 - IN RE: ALFONSO P. BICHARA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    199 Phil. 438

  • G.R. No. L-37477 May 31, 1982 - TORIBIO LESCANO v. JUAN A. BAES, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 440

  • G.R. No. L-39172 May 31, 1982 - SAMUEL DUMLAO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 442

  • G.R. No. L-40101 May 31, 1982 - FABIAN BORLAS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 448

  • G.R. No. L-46245 May 31, 1982 - MERALCO SECURITIES INDUSTRIAL CORP. v. CENTRAL BRD. OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 453

  • G.R. No. L-47334 May 31, 1982 - MIGUEL VIOLAGO, ET AL. v. JOSE C. CAMPOS, JR., ET AL.

    199 Phil. 463

  • G.R. No. L-47943 May 31, 1982 - MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY v. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 465

  • G.R. No. L-50081 May 31, 1982 - SANTOS CODILLA v. FLORENCIA LOPEZ, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 471

  • G.R. No. L-50261 May 31, 1982 - IN RE: CECILIA LAVIDES, ET AL. v. CITY COURT OF LUCENA

    199 Phil. 478

  • G.R. No. L-50466 May 31, 1982 - CALTEX (PHILIPPINES) INC. v. CENTRAL BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 487

  • G.R. No. L-52038 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN ROYO, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 493

  • G.R. No. L-52516 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NILO TALORONG

    199 Phil. 502

  • G.R. No. L-53672 May 31, 1982 - BATA INDUSTRIES, LTD. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 506

  • G.R. No. L-54681 May 31, 1982 - LILIA B. BARRERA v. FRANCIS J. MILITANTE, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 511

  • G.R. No. L-55698 May 31, 1982 - ENGINEERING EQUIPMENT, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 517

  • G.R. No. L-55831 May 31, 1982 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GILBERT MEDRANO, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 520

  • G.R. No. L-57771 May 31, 1982 - QUIRINO CAVILI, ET AL. v. CIPRIANO VAMENTA, JR., ET AL.

    199 Phil. 528

  • G.R. No. L-58681 May 31, 1982 - ALFREDO P. MALIT v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

    199 Phil. 532

  • G.R. No. L-59743 May 31, 1982 - NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SUGAR WORKERS v. ETHELWOLDO R. OVEJERA, ET AL.

    199 Phil. 537