G.R. No. 206528 - Philippine Asset Growth Two, Inc. vs. Fastech Synergy Philippines, Inc.

Filing and Foreclosure
On April 8, 2011, four related corporations—Fastech Synergy Philippines, Inc. (formerly First Asia System Technology, Inc.), Fastech Microassembly & Test, Inc., Fastech Electronique, Inc., and Fastech Properties, Inc.—filed a joint verified petition for corporate rehabilitation with the RTC of Makati City, Branch 149, alleging common management, shared assets, and common creditors and liabilities.
Among the listed creditors was Planters Development Bank (PDB), which had earlier initiated extrajudicial foreclosure on two parcels of land (TCT Nos. T-458102 and T-458103) owned by Fastech Properties. The foreclosure sale was conducted on April 13, 2011, with PDB emerging as highest bidder.

Rehabilitation Plan and RTC-Makati Ruling
Respondents’ proposed Rehabilitation Plan sought: (a) waiver of accrued interests and penalties; (b) a two-year grace period to pay the principal, with capitalized interest thereafter paid over twelve years; and (c) reduced interest rates of 4% p.a. (real estate mortgages) and 2% p.a. (chattel mortgages). On April 19, 2011, the RTC issued a Commencement Order with Stay Order and appointed Atty. Rosario S. Bernaldo as Rehabilitation Receiver.
After preliminary and revised reports by the Rehabilitation Receiver recommending rehabilitation, the RTC-Makati, in a December 9, 2011 Resolution, dismissed the petition. It held respondents’ audited 2009 financial statements unreliable (disclaimer of opinion) and rejected unaudited 2010 statements and confidential projections as insufficient.

Court of Appeals Proceedings
Respondents appealed to the CA (CA-G.R. SP No. 122836) and obtained a TRO (January 24, 2012) and a writ of preliminary injunction (March 22, 2012) enjoining PDB’s foreclosure.
On September 28, 2012, the CA reversed the RTC-Makati, holding that the Rehabilitation Receiver’s opinion carried great weight, that the RTC misunderstood auditor opinions, and that the Plan was feasible. The CA approved the Plan, permanently enjoined PDB from foreclosing the subject properties during implementation, and remanded supervision to the RTC. A motion for reconsideration by PDB was denied on March 5, 2013.

Supreme Court Proceedings
Philippine Asset Growth Two, Inc. (PAGTI), successor-in-interest to PDB, filed a petition for review on certiorari with substitution on April 18, 2013, asserting timely filing from lead counsel’s receipt of notice.
Respondents moved to dismiss for late filing, noting that collaborating counsel (Janda Asia & Associates) received notice of the March 5, 2013 Resolution on March 12, 2013, thus starting the 15-day period. The SC required comments and eventually addressed both procedural and substantive issues.

Whether the petition for review on certiorari was timely filed before the Supreme Court.

Whether the Rehabilitation Plan of the respondents is feasible under the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) and the 2008 Rules of Procedure on Corporate Rehabilitation.