Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-93-811)
Background of the Ejectment Case
George Kaw had leased premises located at 648-650 Padre Rada Street, Tondo, Manila for over twenty years, where he operated "PocketSaver's Mart and Bakeshop." Following IMC's acquisition of the property, Kaw was served demands to vacate the premises, culminating in an ejectment suit filed on May 2, 1990, after Kaw's refusal to leave. The MeTC Judge Anunciacion rendered a decision favoring IMC, which was upheld by the Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals. Immediately after judgment was received by the Kaws, they were allegedly evicted without proper notice to contest the execution.
Allegations of Procedural Impropriety
Alicia Kaw claimed that the issuance of the writ of execution was improper since the MeTC's decision was still appealable to the RTC and that respondent Judge Anunciacion issued the writ the same day it was requested—without notifying the Kaw family. She argued that Sheriff Aribuabo lacked proper authorization to enforce the writ and that Judge Anunciacion unilaterally determined the monthly rentals despite the absence of specified damages by IMC.
Respondents' Defense
Judge Anunciacion defended his inaction on Kaw's motions for extension, asserting they were prohibited under the 1983 Rule on Summary Procedure. He justified the issuance of the writ of execution by citing Rule 70, which stipulates immediate executability of MeTC decisions in unlawful detainer cases. The Sheriff contended he was properly deputized by the judge for the execution of the writ, although he acknowledged not being assigned specifically to the MeTC.
Judicial Findings on Respondent Judge’s Actions
The respondent Judge's decision to assign a monthly rental without a proper basis was examined. The Court determined that there was no grave abuse of discretion concerning the rental amount as previous rulings had determined the discretion of rental evaluation rested with the trial judge. Furthermore, the actions of granting AG Cagayan's motions for extensions were scrutinized, with the Court reaffirming that they were indeed improper.
Findings on the Issuance of Writ of Execution
The Court found that the issuance of the writ without prior notice constituted a denial of due process. The rush with which Judge Anunciacion acted—granting the motion for execution on the same day it was filed—was seen as a violation of established procedures ensuring parties have the opportunity to respond before eviction is enforced.
Examination of Sheriff Aribuabo’s Actions
In assessing the actions of Sheriff Aribuabo, the Court highlighted that he acted without providing the requisite notice to the Kaws. Notably, the execution was enforced on the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. MTJ-93-811)
Background of the Case
- The case originates from a complaint filed by Alicia T. Kaw on March 20, 1993, against Judge Casiano P. Anunciacion Jr. and Sheriff Samuel A. Aribuabo.
- The complaint alleges grave misconduct, incompetence, and partiality in relation to an ejectment case involving Kaw's husband, George L. Kaw, filed by Italy Marketing Corporation (IMC).
- The ejectment case, Civil Case No. 132227-CV, arose after IMC acquired the building where George Kaw operated his business, "PocketSaver's Mart and Bakeshop," after over 20 years of leasing the premises.
Facts of the Ejectment Case
- On May 20, 1989, IMC notified George Kaw of its ownership and demanded he vacate the premises.
- Following several demands, IMC filed an ejectment suit on May 2, 1990, seeking to evict Kaw and collect unpaid rents.
- The summons, served on May 9, 1990, required Kaw to respond within ten days, which he failed to do timely, instead requesting two extensions which the respondent judge did not act upon.
- On June 1, 1990, despite the pending motions, Judge Anunciacion rendered a decision in favor of IMC, ordering Kaw to vacate and pay monthly rentals and attorney's fees.
Allegations by the Complainant
- Kaw and his wife received the judge’s decision on June 7, 1990, and were immediately served with a writ of execution the following day, leading to their eviction and the auction of their business equipment.
- Alicia Kaw contends that the writ of execution was improperly issued as the decision was still appealable to the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
- She claims that there was no notice given for the "Ex Parte M