Case Digest (G.R. No. L-39276)
Facts:
Jose Espeleta v. Hon. Celso Avelino; Shell Philippines, Inc., G.R. No. L-39276, February 24, 1975, Second Division, Fernando, J., writing for the Court. Petitioner Jose Espeleta was defendant in a civil action for recovery of sum of money filed by private respondent Shell Philippines, Inc., which alleged purchases totaling P264,250.29 with an unpaid balance. Espeleta disputed the amount and maintained the unpaid balance should be reduced by items including P8,711.28 for fuel not delivered and P5,994.00 for leakage and wastage.At trial the petitioner had called Adelfa Montano, a Certified Public Accountant, to testify and to account for the disputed transactions; her direct testimony had been started but not completed before the hearing of April 4, 1974. Montano failed to appear that day for cross-examination because she had been ordered by her superiors to undertake an urgent audit in Baybay, Leyte after her employment change. Defense counsel informed the court by telegram and requested postponement; the trial judge denied postponement and, upon plaintiff’s oral motion, issued an order striking Montano’s testimony and the documents identified during her testimony for failure to appear for cross-examination, allowed plaintiff to present a rebuttal witness (Maximo Villarin), and limited defendant’s later documentary offers to those identified during his own testimony.
Petitioner moved for reconsideration twice; the trial judge declined to change his order. Petitioner then filed a petition for certiorari in this Court, alleging deprivation of procedural due process and denial of his right to be heard because the exclusion of Montano’s testimony...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court’s order striking the testimony of Adelfa Montano and excluding documents identified during her testimony deprive petitioner of procedural due process and his right to be heard?
- Did the trial judge abuse his discretion in denying postponement and striking the testimony so as to warran...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)