Case Summary (G.R. No. 177524)
Procedural History
On September 13, 1958, Rebullo filed a complaint for Forcible Entry, which was heard on November 5, 1958. The defendants’ counsel made an oral answer during the hearing, as the written answers submitted were not yet received. On November 12, 1958, the Justice of the Peace Court ruled in favor of Rebullo. The written answers from the defendants arrived twelve days later. Subsequently, on November 15, 1958, the defendants appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Camarines Sur.
Adoption of Written Answer
Within the reglementary period for filing an answer, defendants’ counsel submitted a Manifestation on January 31, 1959, adopting the written answer filed earlier in the Justice of the Peace Court as their official answer in the CFI. Rebullo subsequently filed an Ex-Parte motion to declare the defendants in default, contending that the written answer was not filed in accordance with the Rules.
Declaration of Default
On February 21, 1959, the trial court declared the defendants in default and allowed Rebullo to present evidence in their absence. Defendants subsequently filed a motion to set aside the order of default and to admit their answer, which was denied on February 26, 1959. The trial continued with Rebullo’s evidence, resulting in a judgment favoring her, which included declarations of ownership and orders for the defendants to vacate the property.
Motion for Relief from Judgment
The defendants filed a motion for relief from judgment on March 13, 1959, arguing that a written answer had indeed been submitted to the Justice of the Peace Court, although it was mistakenly omitted from the records when forwarded to the CFI. They asserted their right to present evidence showing Narciso Palo’s ownership of the land. An Affidavit of Merit accompanied the motion.
Opposition to Motion for Relief
Rebullo opposed the Motion for Relief from Judgment on April 9, 1959, asserting procedural defects, including lack of verification and emphasizing that two of the defendants were already in default before the Manifestation was filed. The defendants later attempted to rectify the verification issue.
Trial Court's Order
On February 13, 1960, the trial court denied the motion to set aside the order of default but expunged the part of the judgment declaring Rebullo the owner of the land. The case was then brought to the Court of Appeals, which certified the legal issues involved for consideration.
Legal Issues and Ruling
The primary question was whether the CFI erred in denying the motion for Relief from Judgment and failing to set aside the order of default. The court noted t
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 177524)
Case Overview
- This case involves a complaint for Forcible Entry filed by Domingo Rebullo against Narciso Palo and seven other defendants, heard in the Justice of the Peace Court of Tinambac, Camarines Sur.
- The case was initiated on September 13, 1958, and culminated in a decision on February 26, 1959, with subsequent appeals leading to higher courts.
Background of the Case
- The complaint was filed by Rebullo, asserting his right to a portion of land which he claimed to have possessed since 1957.
- Defendants, including Narciso Palo, were alleged to have occupied the land without permission starting August 21, 1958.
Judicial Proceedings in the Justice of the Peace Court
- The initial hearing took place on November 5, 1958, where the defendants’ counsel presented an oral Answer due to the written Answers not being received by the court.
- The JP Court rendered a judgment in favor of the plaintiff on November 12, 1958.
- After the judgment, the written Answer by the defendants was received by the JP Court but was not included in the records forwarded to the Court of First Instance (CFI).
Appeal to the Court of First Instance
- Defendants appealed the JP Court's decision on November 15, 1958.
- On January 31, 1959, the defendants' counsel filed a Manifestation to adopt their written Answer from the JP Court as their formal Answer in the CFI.