Title
Aldecoa vs. Arellano
Case
G.R. No. L-15616
Decision Date
Sep 19, 1961
Petitioners' appeal dismissed as untimely; constructive notice of decision via registry notices deemed sufficient, rendering appeal outside reglementary period.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-15616)

Case Overview and Background

On March 25, 1958, the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental rendered a decision in Civil Case No. 4352, ordering the petitioners to pay Siguenza the sum of P7,500, with legal interest from the date of the filing of the complaint, along with P1,000 for attorney's fees. Following the decision, the court attempted to serve the ruling to the petitioners' counsel, Atty. Jose Macasa, on March 29, 1958, but he refused to accept the service. Subsequent service attempts were also unsuccessful, leading to the decision being sent via registered mail, which went unclaimed until April 26, 1958.

Timeline of Procedural Events

After the decision was rendered, Siguenza filed a motion for execution on May 8, 1958. Meanwhile, the petitioners filed their notice of appeal and appeal bond on May 19, 1958. Siguenza contested the validity of the appeal on the grounds that it had not been perfected in the required timeframe. The court ordered the motion for execution granted on June 5, 1958, which was followed by the dismissal of the petitioners’ appeal on July 26, 1958. The petitioners' motion for reconsideration was denied on August 9, 1958.

Court of Appeals Proceedings

On September 17, 1958, the petitioners sought a writ of mandamus from the Court of Appeals, challenging the dismissal of their appeal based on alleged non-receipt of the registry notices. The Court of Appeals concluded that the petitioners’ notice of appeal was filed outside the reglementary period, stating that the period to appeal commenced after five days from the first registry notice sent on March 31, 1958. The court’s findings were based on the testimony of the mailman, Dominador Pedria, who indicated that the notices were delivered to an individual residing at Atty. Macasa's address, thereby establishing that the notices were indeed received.

Legal Issue and Resolution

The central legal issue was whether the petitioners' appeal was timely filed. The Court of Appeals determined it was not, highlighting that an elapsed period exceeding the prescribed thir

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.