ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 97-292-RTJ. September 6, 1999]
SOLID HOMES, INC. vs. JUDGE VIVENCIO S. BACLIG
FIRST DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this court dated SEPT 6, 1999.
A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 97-292-RTJ (Solid Homes, Inc. represented by Victorio V. Soliven vs. Judge Vivencio S. Baclig.)
Before us is a verified complaint filed by Mr. Victoriano V. Soliven, President and General Manager of Solid Homes, Incorporated against Judge Vivencio S. Baclig of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 157, Pasig City for conduct unbecoming of a magistrate relative to Civil Case No. 40185 entitled "Investco, Inc. vs. Solid Homes, Inc."
Complainant alleges that on 13 March 1981, Investco filed a complaint against Solid Homes Inc. (SHI for brevity) for enforcement of a contract to sell and to buy dated 7 September 1976 covering five (5) parcels of land (TCT Nos. 35618, 36680, 36681, 36682 and 36684) with a total land area of 335.310 sq. m. located at Marikina City, and another three (3) parcels of land (TCT 254761, 254762, and 256763) with a total land area of 53,333 sq. m. located at Quezon City. The case was docketed as civil case no. 406015.
On 14 February 1985 the trial court, then presided over by Hon. Rafael B. Hilao, rendered a decision, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiffs:
"1.������ The amount of P4,800,282.91 with interest thereon at the rate of one per cent per month from February 23, 1981 until fully paid;
"2.������ The amount of P99,559.00 representing cost of science and transfer taxes which defendant credited to its account with interest at the legal rate from the filing of the complaint;
"3.������ The amount of P250,000.00 to cover attorney's fees and litigation expenses."
On January 21, 1991, SHI appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals which modified the same by adjusting the effectivity of payment of interest rate and by reducing the attorney's fees from P250,000.00 to P50,000.00.
In a petition for review filed by SHI, this Court affirmed the decision of the RTC, but deleted the award of attorney's fees.
On June 19, 1996, SHI filed an Ex-Parte motion for Issuance of writ of execution and prayed that the writ include AFP Mutual Benefit Association, Inc. (AFP MBAI for brevity) as transferee of the subject parcels of land under and by virtue of Rule 3, Section 30 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Respondent Judge Baclig, the acting judge of RTC Pasig, Branch 157 issued, on 10 July 1996, an order treating petitioner's ex-parte motion for issuance of writ of execution as a motion to satisfy judgement.
In accordance with this order, SHI deposited with the respondent's Clerk of Court the amount of P13,186,612.12 and at the same time sent a letter to AFPMBAI tendering payment of P13,186,612.12 and demanding the execution of the deed of conveyance over the parcels of land in Marikina as well as in Quezon City. In its counter manifestation dated 23 July 1996, AFPMBAI insisted that it cannot be considered a transferee "pendente lite" because it had no knowledge of the transactions between Investco, Inc. and SHI, there being no Notice of Lis Pendens annotated on the titles over the subject parcels of land.
On August 16, 1996, respondent judge then issued an Order denying SHI's motion for satisfaction of judgment. This order is now the subject of the instant administrative complaint.
Complainant raises the issue of how counsel for AFPMBAI was able to immediately secure a copy of the order of respondent judge on 19 August 1996, a Monday, when the order was issued on 16 August 1996 which was a Friday. SHI alleged that it came to know of existence of this order only when AFPMBAI filed a petition with the Supreme Court on 20 August 1996 attaching copy of the same. Suspecting something irregular, complainant immediately checked the expendiente of the case and found out that:
"1.������ As of 28 August 1996, no such order was attached to the expendiente;
"2.������ The list of the mail matters in the statement of mailing from 14 August 1996 to 23 August 1996 issued by Rolando Cardenas, legal researcher II of the court that no such order was mailed to any of the parties;
"3.������ As certified by Rolando Cardenas, legal researcher II of the court, the order was released for mailing only on 29 August 1996 upon the request of Atty. Melanio Zoreta, assisting counsel of SHI;
"4.������ Registry receipts of mailing showed that counsel of AFPMBAI received the order on 12 September 1996."
It only goes to show according to complainant that respondent judge extended some favor to AFPMBAI, and this constitutes gross irregularity on the part of the judge, a conduct unbecoming of a magistrate who definitely discredits the judiciary.
In his comment, respondent judge, explained that the counsel for AFPMBAI was able to obtain a copy of his order dated August 16, 1996 from the court on August 19, 1996. The reason for this is that he was able to sign only one copy of the order on August 16, 1996, as he was in a hurry to leave for Bataan. Legal researcher Rolando Cardenas released to one of the parties the copy with the signature of the Judges and was able to furnish the other parties a copy of the order only after the return of the judge from Bataan.
Respondent added that it was due to inadvertence or mental lapse on his part that he was able to sign only one copy of the order. He attributes this to the fact that he is handling two salas, the one in Bataan being his regular sala and the one in Pasig where he is an acting presiding judge.
This, however, should not be considered an excuse for the mistake committed by the judge due to his self-confessed inadvertence and mental lapse. Inasmuch as there is no evidence adduced to prove that the act of respondent judge is animated by bad faith or intent to defraud, we cannot say that respondent Judge Vivencio Baclig was partial to any particular party.
However, we can not at all together condone the inadvertence of respondent judge in the performance of his duties for having failed to ensure prompt and efficient dispatch of the business of the court. In this regard, we ADMONISH respondent judge to be more diligent and careful in the performance of his duties and always be circumspect in his actions.
DAVIDE, JR., C.J . and CHAIRMAN, is on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
