G.R. No. L-35381 - TLG International Continental Enterprising, Inc. vs. Flores

TLG International Continental Enterprising, Inc. petitioned for certiorari challenging the orders dated June 23, 1972, and July 15, 1972.
The petition aimed to set aside these orders which denied the petitioner’s motion to withdraw a deposit of P3,750.00 made by way of consignation.

The petitioner intervened in Civil Case No. 14880 (Bearcon Trading Co., Inc. vs. Juan Fabella et al.) as the sub-lessee of Bearcon Trading Co., Inc.
The intervention was motivated by the need to protect the sub-lessee’s rights and to enable the petitioner to make a consignation of monthly rentals amid the uncertainty regarding the rightful recipient of the payments.
Defendants later filed an omnibus motion requesting the dismissal of both the original complaint and the complaint in intervention on the ground that the subject matter could be properly addressed in another pending ejectment case (Civil Case No. 3979).

Following the court’s admission of the "Complaint in Intervention," the petitioner deposited the following sums with the Clerk of Court:

The total deposit amounted to P3,750.00, which was duly covered by official receipts.
The deposit was made under the provision of Article 1258 of the new Civil Code, which mandates consignation of monies or things due to be deposited before the judicial authority.

On May 27, 1972, petitioner filed a Motion to withdraw the deposited sums, claiming that the dismissal of both the primary case and the complaint in intervention left the petitioner without recourse other than withdrawal.
The motion was denied by the responding judge on June 23, 1972, and a subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied on July 15, 1972.

The petitioner raised the sole issue regarding whether the withdrawal of the deposit should be authorized given the court’s prior dismissal of the case and the absence of any judicial order directing the deposit.
The petitioner argued that the deposit should be withdrawn since it had not been accepted by any creditor nor approved judicially as a valid consignation.

Whether the deposit made by the petitioner, as part of its consignation in the intervention of Civil Case No. 14880, may be withdrawn when the case was dismissed without a judicial declaration of proper consignation.
Whether the respondent could justifiably deny the withdrawal on the basis that the court “has not ordered” the petitioner (intervenor) to deposit the sums in connection with the case.