G.R. No. L-64931 - Universal Far East Corp. vs. Court of Appeals

On December 28, 1982, the lower court rendered a decision ordering Emilio Ching to pay Universal Far East Corporation P162,978.12 plus 14% per annum interest from November 1977, along with P10,000 as attorney’s fees.
The decision was served to Universal Far East Corporation, which received a copy on January 14, 1983.

On January 17, 1983, three days after receiving the decision, the corporation filed a motion for execution pending appeal on the ground that Ching was insolvent and that his appeal would be dilatory.
The corporation offered to post a bond and served the motion on Ching on the same day.
The motion was initially set for hearing on January 19, 1983 but was postponed because the Presiding Judge and other judges were in conference with the Chief Justice regarding the judiciary revamp.
The hearing was later reset for March 4, 1983.

Ching, having received a copy of the decision on January 12, 1983, filed his notice of appeal on January 27, 1983 (the 15th day for appeal).
He requested a 15-day extension (from January 19) to file his opposition to the execution motion.
His opposition was eventually mailed on February 3, 1983, after the perfection of his appeal.
At the March 4 hearing, Ching was given five days to file a rejoinder to the corporation’s reply, but he did not file any rejoinder.
Instead, on March 23, 1983, Ching filed a manifestation contending that under Section 9, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, the trial court no longer had jurisdiction to grant execution pending appeal since his appeal had already been perfected.

The trial court granted the motion for execution pending appeal on May 30, 1983 (over four months after the perfection of the appeal), basing its decision on Ching’s insolvency.
A bond in the sum of P280,866.72 was required to be posted by the corporation.
The trial court issued an order for execution on June 4, 1983.
Acting on Ching’s notice of appeal dated January 27, 1983, the trial court ordered that the record be elevated to the Intermediate Appellate Court on June 10, 1983. The record was actually elevated on August 30, 1983.
Ching assailed the execution pending appeal through a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus filed on June 13, 1983 before the Appellate Court.
On July 8, 1983, the Appellate Court set aside the order of execution on the ground that the trial court had no jurisdiction to grant execution once the appeal’s perfection occurred.

Universal Far East Corporation then appealed the Appellate Court’s ruling, bringing the case before the Supreme Court.

Whether the trial court retained jurisdiction to issue an order for execution pending appeal after the perfection of the appeal.
Whether the filing of the motion for execution pending appeal within the reglementary period secures the trial court’s jurisdiction, even if the resolution is rendered after the perfection of the appeal.

Whether it is mandatory for the trial court to resolve the motion for execution within the standard fifteen-day period for appeal.
The implications of allowing the trial court more time to hear the motion for execution pending appeal, particularly given the request for an extension by respondent Ching for filing his opposition.

Whether the trial court’s action on the motion for execution pending appeal is valid given that Ching’s appeal was perfected prior to the resolution.
How the interim rules interact with the traditional rules regarding the loss of trial court jurisdiction upon the perfection of the appeal.