Case Digest (G.R. No. L-46255)
Facts:
Aurelio Litonjua v. The Court of Appeals and Tarcelo Penaranda, G.R. No. L-46255, October 28, 1977, Supreme Court First Division, Guerrero, J., writing for the Court. This is a Rule 45 petition for review by certiorari from the Court of Appeals' decision and its resolution denying a motion for reconsideration.
The underlying action was Civil Case No. 17853 filed in the Court of First Instance of Rizal by Tarcelo Penaranda against Aurelio Litonjua for unpaid wages and related claims. Because defendant Litonjua did not answer the complaint, the trial court declared him in default, allowed plaintiff to present evidence ex parte, and rendered judgment on August 16, 1973 awarding specified sums (underpayment, overtime, separation pay, attorney’s fees and costs).
On September 3, 1973 defendant filed a Motion to Set Aside Judgment by Default and/or for New Trial asserting he first learned of the suit only upon notification of the decision on August 27, 1973 and that he had never been served with summons. Attached to the motion was an affidavit by Rodolfo Pamintuan (cashier of E & L Realty Co.) stating that a sheriff visited the E & L Building sometime in June 1973 seeking Litonjua, that Pamintuan refused to accept the summons or sign for it because he was not authorized, and that he informed the sheriff of Litonjua’s residence at 1536 Princeton St., Wack Wack Subdivision, Mandaluyong.
The Record on Appeal reflected the sheriff’s return as “service thru Miss Rudy Pamintuan, who (however) refused to sign the receipt hereof but tender the same.” The trial court denied the motion to set aside the default judgment. On October 1, 1973 Litonjua, through counsel, manifested intent to appeal; his Record on Appeal was approved and the case was forwarded to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court, finding the judgment in acco...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was there valid service of summons upon the defendant that conferred jurisdiction on the trial court?
- If not, should the default order, default judgment and other proceedings be set aside and the case remanded for trial ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)