Enriqueta Gargar de Julio filed a complaint on June 15, 1989 charging Judge Benjamin A.G. Vega (formerly of the City Court of Olongapo City, now of the Regional Trial Court an Manila) with conduct unbecoming a judge ("hindi karapat-dapat gawain ng isang nanunungkulan huwes, na nagbibigay ng walang pagtitiwala at deskumpiyansa sa mamamayan"). (p. 1, Rollo.)

The records show that in 1977 Judge Benjamin Vega and his wife, Carmelita Vega, leased for a monthly rental of P500, the complainant's building at No. 2706-A Rizal Avenue, Olongapo City, where they operated a bake shop and hot pandesal business on the premises. The lessees used to pay the rent regularly but defaulted beginning July 16, 1977. The owner made verbal demands for payment but the lessees did not heed them. On November 25, 1977, a demand letter was sent by the complainant, through counsel, to the lessees. As the Vegas failed to comply with the lessors' demands, the latter filed an ejectment complaint on January 23, 1978 in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 1, Olongapo City (Civil Case No. 1690, entitled: "Enrique A. Gargar and Juan de Julio, plaintiffs vs. Carmelita Vega, joined by her husband, Benjamin Vega, defendants").

Answering the ejectment complaint, the defendants alleged that no rents were due after July 15, 1977 for they stopped the operation of their bake shop on that date after Judge Vega was promoted to the Court of First Instance of Palawan.

The trial lasted ten (10) years on account of Judge Vega's dilatory tactics compounded by his over-extended testimony (he took the witness stand seven times) while a succession of four different judges took turns presiding over the court. Judgment was rendered by Municipal Judge Emet B. Manalo on February 18, 1987, the dispositive part of which reads:

"WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the defendants to pay the plaintiffs the sum of Two Thousand Five Hundred (P2,500.00) Pesos representing payment of rentals for five (5) months at the rate of P500.00 a month, from December 5, 1977 (the date when plaintiffs' demand letter was received by the defendants) up to April 5, 1978 the date more or less when the defendants actually vacated the leased premises, plus interest computed at legal rate reckoned from the dates they became due, plus attorney's fee in the amount of P500.00." (p. 12, MTC, Judgment.)

The amount due on the judgment, including legal rate of interest (over a period of ten years) and attorney's fees, was only P4,500, but respondent would not give his lessors the satisfaction of recovering what was due them. He appealed the decision to the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City which affirmed it. From the Regional Trial Court, he took the case to the Court of Appeals which dismissed his petition for review.

Even after the judgment had become final, its execution was delayed because Judge Vega questioned the computation of the amount due (P4,500). When the writ of execution was presented to him in his office at Malolos, Bulacan (from Palawan, he was transferred to the Regional Trial Court in Malolos, Bulacan), he advised the sheriff to serve it at his house in Quezon City. Neither the original nor the alias writ of execution was satisfied. It was only after the complainant filed this administrative case against him on June 15, 1989 that Judge Vega paid through the Assistant Clerk of Court on July 21, 1989 the sum of P4,500 on the judgment in Civil Case No. 1690 (Annex 1).

The facts of this case limn an unflattering picture of a judge who by abuse of his legal expertise and through dilatory maneuvers, managed to evade and delay the payment of a just debt.

Willful failure to pay a just debt is a serious offense under Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by the resolution of this Court dated July 25, 1974. The amount involved (P4,500) is not big. He could easily have paid it, but it appears that he was bent on frustrating the complainant's best efforts to obtain satisfaction of her lawful claim, apparently for no other reason than to annoy and oppress her for having haled him and his wife into court. While an ejectment case is supposed to be summary in nature respondent Judge, through dilatory tactics, stretched the trial over a period of ten (10) years, and dragged the case all the way from the municipal court to the Court of Appeals. After the decision had become final, he delayed payment for two more years. He came across only after the complainant in exasperation had filed this administrative charge against him.

There is no doubt in the mind of this Court that respondent judge's conduct toward the complainant was oppressive and unbecoming a member of the judiciary. He used his position and his legal knowledge to welsh on a just debt and to harrass his creditor. His example erodes public faith in the capacity of courts to administer justice. He violated Rule 2.01, Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct which requires that "a judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary."

WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Judge Benjamin A.G. Vega guilty of oppressive conduct and willful delay in paying a just debt (Section 5, Rule 140, Rules of Court as amended). He is ordered to pay a fine of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000) and is hereby warned that a repetition of this misconduct in the future will be dealt with more severely.

SO ORDERED.

Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Paras, Bidin, Grino-Aquino, Medialdea, Regalado, and Davide, Jr., JJ., concur.
Padilla, J., see concurring and dissenting opinion.
Melencio-Herrera, Feliciano, and Sarmiento, JJ., join in the concurring and dissenting opinion of Justice Padilla.
Gancayco, J., on leave.