Title
Spouses Badillo vs. Tayag
Case
G.R. No. 143976
Decision Date
Apr 3, 2003
Dispute over land in Bagong Silang Resettlement Project; NHA appealed MTC ruling but failed to pay fees on time. SC upheld NHA's appeal, exempted bond, and deleted rental award due to lack of evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 143976)

Petitioner and Respondent Roles

Petitioners sued NHA and its contractor for forcible entry and ejectment in the MTC of San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. NHA appealed the MTC decision ordering it to vacate and pay damages. RTC Branch 79 and Branch 11 issued conflicting rulings, prompting review.

Key Dates

– February 1, 2000: MTC Decision orders NHA to vacate, pay rent at ₱10/sqm/month, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses and costs.
– February 24, 2000: NHA files Notice of Appeal but fails to pay docket fees within 15 days.
– May 23 & May 30, 2000: MTC issues Order and Writ of Execution.
– July 19, 2000: RTC Branch 79 annuls MTC orders and writ.
– October 23, 2000: RTC Branch 11 modifies MTC decision by deleting rental award.

Applicable Law

– 1987 Constitution provisions on social justice and state obligation to provide housing.
– PD No. 757 (NHA charter) and RA No. 7279 (Urban Development and Housing Act).
– 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, particularly Rule 40 (appeals from MTC to RTC) and Rule 70 (supersedeas bonds).
– Rule 141, Section 21 (legal fees).

Facts of the Case

The disputed land formed part of NHA’s Bagong Silang Resettlement Project, developed under contract with Triad Construction. Petitioners claimed title and exclusive possession to a portion awarded to Triad and resisted NHA’s entry. MTC found for petitioners, ordered ejectment, rent and indemnity. NHA perfected appeal but omitted timely payment of appellate docket fees and supersedeas bond.

Procedural History

Upon NHA’s failure to pay fees and bond, petitioners moved for immediate execution. MTC issued writ of execution and garnishment. NHA petitioned RTC for certiorari, which Branch 79 granted, holding that appeal was perfected upon timely notice and that NHA, as government corporation performing governmental functions, was exempt from fees and bond. Branch 11 later affirmed the ejectment and indemnities but deleted rental award for lack of evidence.

Issues Presented

  1. Whether NHA’s failure to pay appellate docket fees within 15 days invalidated its appeal.
  2. Whether NHA is exempt from posting a supersedeas bond to stay execution.
  3. Whether deletion of rental award by RTC conforms to law and jurisprudence.

Payment of Appellate Docket Fees

The Court held that under Rule 40 and Rule 41 of the 1997 Rules, perfection of an appeal from MTC to RTC occurs upon filing the notice of appeal within 15 days. Nonpayment of docket fees is directory, not mandatory, and does not automatically dismiss the appeal. The appellate court may, in its discretion, dismiss for nonpayment, but the MTC had already lost jurisdiction upon perfection of appeal by notice.

Supersedeas Bond Requirement

As a government-owned corporation exercising governmental functions, NHA is presumed solvent and exempt from filing supersedeas bonds under Section 19, Rule 70. Requiring a bond would

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.