Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1985 > June 1985 Decisions > G.R. No. L-63737 June 27, 1985 - PEDRO BISNAR v. JOSE G. ESTRADA:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-63737. June 27, 1985.]

PEDRO BISNAR and PETRONILA BISNAR, Petitioners, v. HON. JUDGE JOSE G. ESTRADA, in his capacity as Regional Trial Court Judge, Branch VI, Mati, Davao Oriental, and TIMIDINO INTING, Respondents.

Antonio K. Cañon, for Petitioners.

Gregorio J. Jimenez for Private Respondent.


R E S O L U T I O N


ALAMPAY, J.:


The petition for certiorari and mandamus in this case is against the order of respondent Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Davao, Branch VI, dated February 4, 1983 dismissing the petitioner’s appeal from the decision rendered in Civil Case No. 613 of the Court of First Instance of Davao, Branch I, dated December 29, 1982, as well as the subsequent order of the respondent Judge herein denying petitioners’ motion for reconsideration of the challenged order.

On September 8, 1977, a complaint for accounting and damages was filed by private respondent Timidino Inting against the petitioners herein, which was docketed as Civil Case No. 613 of the Court of First Instance of Davao Oriental, Branch I. After trial, judgment was rendered on December 29, 1982 in favor of the private respondent, copy of which was received by the petitioners through their original counsel on January 5, 1983. When petitioners’ original counsel withdrew from the Antonio K. Cannon who then filed in the court below on February 4, 1983 petitioners’ notice of appeal from the adverse decision rendered against them. However, on February 8, 1983, petitioners’ appeal was dismissed by the respondent Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch VI, only on the ground that Section 39 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 which was implemented and made effective on January 17, 1983 prescribes the period of appeal to be fifteen (15) days from notice of the judgment or decision appealed from and on this consideration the petitioners’ appeal was considered belated and filed out of time. On March 11, 1983, petitioners’ motion for reconsideration of the dismissal of their appeal was also denied by respondent Judge. This led to the filing of the instant petition for certiorari and mandamus in order that petitioners’ appeal may be given due course.chanrobles law library

Respondents were required under the resolution of this Court dated February 13, 1983 to comment to the petition. The corresponding comment of the private respondent, dated March 21, 1985 submitted to this Court is treated as his answer to the petition.

The contention of the private respondent is that from January 5, 1983, when petitioners, through their original counsel received a copy of the decision, to January 17, 1983 — the date of the effectivity of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, a period of twelve (12) days had elapsed. From January 17, 1983, petitioners would then have fifteen (15) days therefrom within which to register their appeal, or up to February 1, 1983. Petitioners, however, filed their notice of appeal only on February 4, 1983 which private respondent submits would be, therefore, three (3) days late. Aside from this, he claims that the appeal interposed by the petitioners is merely a dilatory tactic.

We resolve to give due course to the instant petition.

When a copy of the decision in the case was received by the petitioners on January 5, 1983, the law then prevailing afforded petitioners thirty (30) days from said date within which to register their appeal, or up to February 4, 1983. That in the meantime, Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 was implemented on January 17, 1983 which provides for a shorter period of fifteen (15) days within which to perfect an appeal will not serve to bar the petitioners’ right to appeal.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Considering the factual background of this case, the appeal should be allowed if only on the general principle "that remedial laws should be construed liberally, in order that litigants may have ample opportunity to prove their respective claims, and possible denial of substantial justice due to legal technicalities, may be avoided." (Luzon Stevedoring Corporation v. Court of Industrial Relations, 15 SCRA 660, citing Concepcion, Et. Al. v. Payatas Estate Improvement Company, Inc., L-11531-33, May 30, 1958).

Accordingly, the orders of respondent Judge dated February 8, 1983 and March 11, 1983, which dismiss petitioners’ appeal in said Civil Case No. 613 are hereby SET ASIDE and respondent Judge is hereby ordered to give due course to the appeal and to forward the records of said case to the Intermediate Appellate Court for disposition on the merits.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

No costs.

SO ORDERED.

Teehankee (Chairman), Melencio-Herrera, Plana, Relova, Gutierrez, Jr. and De la Fuente, 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






June-1985 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-61231 June 18, 1985 - UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-65418 June 18, 1985 - COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS OF MANILA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT

  • G.R. No. L-68374 June 18, 1985 - HORACIO LUNA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT

  • A.M. No. R-54-RTJ June 19, 1985 - FRANCISCO FAGTANAC v. ODON YRAD, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-38012 June 19, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO BASELOY

  • G.R. No. L-45824 June 19, 1985 - VOLKSCHEL LABOR UNION v. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-50248 June 19, 1985 - ARCADIO ESPIRITU v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-50992 June 19, 1985 - NATIVIDAD SAMPANG v. AMADO G. INCIONG

  • G.R. Nos. L-51923-25 June 19, 1985 - ALICIA V. ALVIA v. SANDIGANBAYAN

  • G.R. No. L-55102 June 19, 1985 - GORGONIO TEJERO v. EULALIO D. ROSETE

  • G.R. No. L-56451 June 19, 1985 - JUAN LAO v. MELECIO A. GENATO

  • G.R. No. L-60149 June 19, 1985 - MARINDUQUE MINING AND INDUSTRIAL CORP. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. L-62297 June 19, 1985 - CARMELO A. ARREZA v. GREGORIO ARANETA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION

  • G.R. No. L-62387 June 19, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AVELINO REYES

  • G.R. No. L-67573 June 19, 1985 - TRADE UNIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND ALLIED SERVICES v. BLAS. F. OPLE

  • G.R. Nos. L-69810-14 June 19, 1985 - TEODULO RURA v. GERVACIO A. LOPENA

  • G.R. No. L-40422 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TIRSO CANOY

  • G.R. No. L-45083 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANGEL SUNGA

  • G.R. No. L-45715 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LIBERATO PASCO, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-48360 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO BARACA

  • G.R. No. L-55417 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NAPOLEON M. PACABES

  • G.R. No. L-61165 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRED PELIAS JONES

  • G.R. No. L-65676 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUFEMIO EGAS

  • G.R. Nos. L-66570-71 June 24, 1985 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PABLING TUSCANO

  • G.R. No. L-70230 June 24, 1985 - TEODORICO CASTILLO v. PROCORO J. DONATO

  • G.R. No. L-39181 June 27, 1985 - DELFIN JASMIN v. MIGUEL VALERA

  • G.R. No. L-43179 June 27, 1985 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILS. v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-44051 June 27, 1985 - EUFRACIA VDA. DE CRISOLOGO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-44823 June 27, 1985 - VICENTE OUANO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-45157 June 27, 1985 - MELY TANGONAN v. ERNANI CRUZ PAÑO

  • G.R. No. L-48814 June 27, 1985 - REYNOLDS PHILIPPINE CORP. v. GENARO A. ESLAVA

  • G.R. No. L-53427 June 27, 1985 - CESAR ARICA v. MINISTER OF LABOR

  • G.R. No. L-56866 June 27, 1985 - EDEN TAN v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-63737 June 27, 1985 - PEDRO BISNAR v. JOSE G. ESTRADA

  • G.R. No. L-69885 June 27, 1985 - FRANCISCO ESGUERRA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-41615 June 29, 1985 - CENTRAL AZUCARERA DEL DANAO v. COURT OF APPEALS

  • G.R. No. L-43828 June 29, 1985 - BALTAZAR C. REYES v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-44616 June 29, 1985 - MARIA U. ESPAÑOL v. BOARD, PHILIPPINE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION

  • G.R. No. L-63658 June 29, 1985 - JAMES A. STRONG v. JOSE P. CASTRO

  • G.R. No. L-66870-72 June 29, 1985 - AGAPITO MAGBANUA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT