The Rules of Civil Procedure do not provide for
automatic sanction should a party fail to submit the required
explanation for resorting to service by registered mail rather than
personal service.
In a six-page decision penned by Justice Roberto A. Abad,
the Court's Third Division unanimously held that both the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Lingayen, Pangasinan (Branch 37) and the Court of
Appeals did not gravely abuse their discretion when both courts ruled
against the striking out of the motion for judgment by default filed by
private respondent Roberto and Arabela Arcinue (Arcinues) against
petitioner Natividad Lim (Lim) for failure of the Arcinues to submit
the aforesaid required explanation.
The Court pointed out Rule 13, Section 11 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
“does not provide for automatic sanction should a party fail to submit
the required explanation. It merely provides for that possibility
considering its use of the term ‘may.’” Moreover, the same “does not
altogether prohibit service by registered mail when such service, when
adopted, ensures as in this case receipt by the adverse party.” It
noted that Lim’s counsel in fact even admitted to receiving a copy of
the Arcinues’ motion 10 days before the scheduled hearing on the said
motion. The Court thus directed the RTC to proceed with the hearing and
adjudication of the case.
National Power Corporation (NPC) filed an expropriation suit
against petitioner Lim for its Coal-Fired Thermal Power Project.
Private respondents Arcinue spouses filed a motion for leave to admit
their complaint-in-intervention, alleging that they owned and were in
possession of one of the lots subject of the expropriation. The RTC
granted the Arcinues’ motion and required both NPC and Lim to answer the
complaint-in-intervention within 10 days from receipt of its order.
Because NPC and Lim failed to file their respective answers, the
Arcinues filed a motion for judgment by default. Lim then sought to
expunge the motion for lack of the requisite explanation why the
Arcinues resorted to service by registered mail rather than personal
service. Both the RTC and the CA ruled against this, prompting her to
file a petition with the Court. (GR No. 178789, Lim v. NPC, November 14, 2012)
No comments:
Post a Comment