G.R. No. L-41667 - Delta Motor Sales Corp. vs. Mangosing

Delta Motor Sales Corporation (hereinafter “Delta Motor”) was sued by Jose Luis Pamintuan for P58,000 to recover damages and attorney’s fees, alleging breach of warranty in the sale of a Toyota car.
The action arose from the sale of a Toyota car for P33,950, which allegedly had defects such as leaks from its windshield, doors, and windows that Delta Motor failed to rectify under its warranty obligations.

Summons was served on April 9, 1975, on Delta Motor’s employee, Dionisia G. Miranda, who acknowledged receipt by signing the original summons.
Delta Motor failed to answer the complaint within the reglementary period expiring on May 4, 1975.
On May 27, 1975, Pamintuan filed a motion to declare Delta Motor in default, and the Manila court granted the motion on June 3, 1975.
In a decision on June 16, 1975, the lower court found in favor of Pamintuan, awarding damages in the amount of P45,000 and issuing a judgment by default.

On July 21, 1975, Delta Motor filed a petition to lift the order of default, set aside the judgment, and obtain a new trial.

Delta Motor contended that the service on Dionisia G. Miranda was improper because she was not the designated corporate officer (i.e., she was secretary to Alberto Ramos, who was on sick leave).
It also raised substantive defenses by alleging that Pamintuan was indebted to it for P25,000 and that Toyota Motor Sales Company was actually responsible for the breach of warranty.

Supporting affidavits from Dionisia G. Miranda and Geldino S. Santos confirmed her role as Ramos’ secretary, reinforcing Delta Motor’s position regarding improper service.
The lower court denied the petition on July 29, 1975, ruling that Miranda, being a person of suitable age and discretion, could receive summons for another person as allowed under Section 8, Rule 14 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Delta Motor filed a motion for reconsideration on August 8, 1975, which was also denied on August 25, 1975.
An appeal was subsequently filed on September 5, 1975, after depositing an appeal bond, but the Manila court, on October 13, 1975, refused to give due course to Delta Motor’s appeal and executed the judgment in favor of Pamintuan.

On May 27, 1975, while the default motion was being processed in Manila, Delta Motor filed a counter-suit in the Court of First Instance of Rizal (Pasig Branch XIII, Civil Case No. 21303) for the rescission of the sale and recovery of the car.
A writ of replevin in the Rizal case led to the seizure of the Toyota car by a deputy sheriff on June 6, 1975.
Pamintuan countered with a motion to dismiss the Pasig complaint on grounds of pendency with the Manila case, but the motion was denied.
Pamintuan also filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which was ultimately denied on February 16, 1976, upholding the Rizal court’s action.

Whether Delta Motor was properly served with summons given that service was effected on Dionisia G. Miranda, who was not among the officers or agents specified under Section 13 of Rule 14 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Whether the improper service of summons deprived the Manila court of jurisdiction over Delta Motor, thereby rendering the subsequent default order, judgment by default, and execution void.
Whether the consolidation/transfer of the related proceedings between the Manila case (Civil Case No. 97373) and the Rizal case (Civil Case No. 21303) was necessary to avoid conflicting decisions.