Case Digest (G.R. No. L-23065)
Facts:
The case involves Pedro Babala as the petitioner and the Hon. Court of Appeals and Patricio Canela as the respondents. The events leading to this case began with a civil suit filed by Patricio Canela against Pedro Babala in the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte, designated as Civil Case No. 317. Following the judgment in this case, Babala sought to appeal the decision. On February 13, 1964, the Court of Appeals sent a notice via registered mail to Babala's counsel, Attorney Edmundo A. Narra, instructing him to pay the docket fee within 15 days and to file the printed record on appeal within 60 days. This notice was received by Nicolas Lamadrid, a bookkeeper at the Rural Bank of Daet, Inc., where Narra had his office. A second notice was sent on February 24, 1964, which was received by Rebecca B. Abilgos, an assistant manager at the same bank, while Narra was again out of the office. Neither notice was retrieved from the post office by Narra. Consequently, on Apri...
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-23065)
Facts:
Background of the Case:
- The case originated from Civil Case No. 317 of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte, where Patricio Canela (plaintiff) sued Pedro Babala (defendant).
- Defendant Pedro Babala appealed the judgment to the Court of Appeals.
Notice of Docket Fee and Record on Appeal:
- The Court of Appeals issued a notice by registered mail, requiring defendant to pay the docket fee within 15 days and file the printed record on appeal within 60 days from notice.
- The first registry notice was received by Nicolas Lamadrid, a bookkeeper at the Rural Bank of Daet, Inc., on February 13, 1964.
- The second registry notice was received by Rebecca B. Abilgos, an assistant manager at the same bank, on February 24, 1964.
- Both notices were addressed to defendant's counsel, Atty. Edmundo A. Narra, who was out of the office during both instances.
- The registered mail was not claimed from the post office.
Dismissal of the Appeal:
- On April 8, 1964, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for failure to pay the docketing fee.
- A motion for reconsideration was denied on May 6, 1964, and a second motion was overruled on May 26, 1964.
Petition to the Supreme Court:
- Defendant Pedro Babala filed a petition for certiorari to overturn the Court of Appeals' resolutions and for mandamus to compel reinstatement of the appeal.
Issue:
- Whether the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the appeal for failure to pay the docketing fee.
- Whether the negligence of defendant's counsel in failing to receive the registry notices constitutes a valid excuse for non-compliance with the court's requirements.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)