8/20/2015

G.R.No.L6450

TodayisThursday,August20,2015

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.L6450August11,1954
GONZALOMAKABENTA,petitioner,
vs.
JUANL.BOCAR,JudgeofFirstInstanceofLeyte,andFILOMENOR.NEGADO,respondents.
AlbertoT.Agujaforpetitioner.
MateoCanonoyforrespondents.
REYES,J.B.L.,J.:
On September 30, 1950, Filomeno R. Negado filed a complaint in the Justice of the Peace Court of Carigara,
Leyte, against Gonzalo Makabenta for the recovery of a sum of money. Within the prescribed period, the
defendantGonzaloMakabentafiledhisanswerwithcounterclaim.Afterissueshadbeenjoined,thecasewasset
for trial on September 18, 1951. At the trial, defendant failed to appear plaintiff moved that the former be
declared in default, and accordingly, the Justice of the Peace Court declared him in default and ordered the
plaintiff to present his evidence. Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff on November 24, 1951, copy of which
defendantMakabentareceivedonDecember8,1951,anditwasonlythenthathelearnedforthefirsttimethat
he was declared in default and that judgment by default had been taken against him. Whereupon, defendant
Gonzalo Makabenta appealed to the Court of First Instance of Leyte (Civil Case No. 1453), where both parties
filedtheirrespectivepleadings.Whenthecasewasreadyfortrial,theplaintiffappelleeFilomenoR.Negadofiled
onJuly20,1952amotionforthedismissaloftheappealonthegroundthattheappellanthadbeendeclaredin
default in the Justice of the Peace Court and had, therefore, no standing in court. The Court of First Instance
consideredthemotionwelltakenanddismissedtheappeal,holdingthatMakabentahadnorighttoappealunless
theorderdeclaringhimindefaultisfirstsetaside.Amotionforthereconsiderationoftheorderofdismissalwas
denied,anddefendantappellantGonzaloMakabentacametothiscourtwithapetitionforcertiorari,askingthat
afterduehearing,theorderoftherespondentJudgedismissinghisappealbeannulled,andthecasesetfortrial
onthemerits.
Thepetitionmustbegranted.TheorderofdefaulttakenagainstthepetitionerGonzaloMakabentaintheJustice
ofthePeaceCourtofCarigara,Leyteisclearlyillegalandwithouteffectforalthoughpetitionerfailedtoappear
duringthetrialofthecasetherein,hefiledhisanswertothecomplaint,andaswehaveconsistentlyheld,thesole
groundfordefaultintheinferiorcourtsisfailuretoappeal(Veluzvs.JusticeofthePeaceofSariaya,42Phil.,557
Quizanvs.Arellano,90Phil.,644,Carballovs.Hon.DemetrioB.Encarnacion,etal.,92Phil.,974).Byfilinghis
answerintheJusticeofthePeaceCourt,petitionerputinhisappearanceandsubmittedtoitsjurisdictionhence,
hewasnot,andshouldnothavebeendeclared,indefault.Whileitwasdiscretionaryforthecourttoproceedwith
thetrialofthecaseintheabsenceofpetitionerorhiscounsel,andrenderjudgmentonthebasisoftheevidence
presentedbytheplaintiff,suchjudgmentwasnotbydefault,andpetitionercould,underthelaw,appeal,ashein
factdidappeal,totheCourtofFirstInstance(Carballovs.Hon.DemetrioB.Encarnacion,supra).Consequently,
indismissingpetitioner'sappealonthegroundthathehadnostandingincourtunlesstheorderofdefaultisfirst
setaside,therespondentCourtcommittedagraveabuseofdiscretionamountingtolackofjurisdiction.
Thispetitionforcertioraritoannultheorderofdismissaloftheappealisinthenatureofapetitionformandamus
toordertheCourtofFirstInstancetoproceedwiththehearingofthecase,anditisnotbarredbythefactthatthe
ordercomplainedofwasappealable(Quizanvs.Arellano,Supra).
Wherefore, the petition for certiorari is granted, the order of the court a quo dismissing petitioner's appeal is
annulled,andtherespondentjudgeisherebydirectedtoreinstatesaidappealandproceedwiththetrialofthe
caseonthemerits.CoststobetaxedagainsttherespondentFilomenoR.Negado.
Paras,C.J.,Pablo,Bengzon,Padilla,Montemayor,Reyes,A.,Jugo,BautistaAngela,LabradorandConcepcion,
JJ.,concur.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1954/aug1954/gr_l6450_1954.html

1/2

8/20/2015

G.R.No.L6450

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1954/aug1954/gr_l6450_1954.html

2/2