G.R. No. RTJ-11-2283. November 16, 2011.
ATTY. LETICIA E. ALA, Complainant, vs. JUDGE SOLIVER C. PERAS, JUDGE SIMEON P. DUMDUM, JR., JUDGE GENEROSA C. LABRA, JEOFFREY S. JOAQUINO, EL CID R. CABALLES, and FORTUNATO T. VIOVICENTE, JR., Respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Atty. Leticia E. Ala was the former counsel of Adelaida Alba-Chua in a nullity of marriage case (Civil Case No. Q-00-40681) before the RTC of Quezon City. A Partial Judgment dated August 12, 2003, based on a compromise agreement, obligated the husband, Benson Go Chua, to pay complainant’s attorney’s fees. A writ of execution was issued, and after partial payment, an alias writ was issued on July 14, 2005, for the balance. The alias writ was implemented in Cebu City by respondent Sheriff El Cid R. Caballes, who levied on the conjugal home of the spouses (TCT No. 110723) and scheduled a public auction for November 9, 2006.
On November 3, 2006, VTL Realty Corporation filed an independent action (Civil Case No. CEB-32893) for Injunction and Damages with Application for TRO to enjoin the auction, claiming it owned the property due to a prior foreclosure. The case was initially raffled to respondent Judge Simeon P. Dumdum, Jr., who issued a 72-hour TRO. After the TRO lapsed, the property was sold at auction on November 9, 2006, and awarded to complainant. The sale was registered on November 17, 2006.
The injunction case was re-raffled to respondent Judge Generosa C. Labra, who denied complainant’s Motion to Dismiss. After Judge Labra inhibited herself, the case was re-raffled to respondent Judge Soliver C. Peras. On December 3, 2007, Judge Peras issued a Writ of Preliminary Injunction to enjoin the issuance of a new TCT in complainant’s name. Meanwhile, in the nullity case, which had been re-raffled to RTC Quezon City, Branch 102 (Judge Lourdes A. Giron), an Order also dated December 3, 2007, directed the issuance of a Sheriff’s Final Certificate of Sale and a Writ of Possession in favor of complainant, and the cancellation of TCT No. 110723. Possession was turned over to complainant on December 27, 2007.
Benson Go Chua challenged the execution sale via certiorari in the CA (CA G.R. SP No. 98597), which was dismissed. His petition for review to the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 183791) was denied in a Resolution dated October 6, 2008, which became final and executory on April 17, 2009. Despite this, respondent Judge Peras, in an Order dated July 7, 2010, denied complainant’s Motion to Dismiss the injunction case. Complainant filed the present administrative complaint against the respondents for various alleged violations.

ISSUE

Whether the respondents are administratively liable for their actions and omissions in relation to Civil Case No. CEB-32893 and the implementation of the writs of execution.

RULING

The Supreme Court found the respondents administratively liable as follows:
1. Judge Soliver C. Peras was found guilty of Gross Ignorance of the Law and fined P40,000. The Court held that he exhibited gross ignorance by: (a) failing to recognize the final and executory judgment of the Supreme Court in G.R. No. 183791, which affirmed the validity of the execution sale; (b) improperly exercising jurisdiction to nullify an execution sale conducted by a co-equal court (RTC Quezon City), thereby interfering with its processes; and (c) issuing a writ of preliminary injunction against the implementation of the Quezon City court’s orders, which constituted an unlawful restraint on a co-equal court. His actions demonstrated a blatant disregard of settled law and jurisprudence.
2. Judge Simeon P. Dumdum, Jr. was found NOT ADMINISTRATIVELY LIABLE. The issuance of the 72-hour TRO was a provisional remedy within his judicial discretion, and there was no clear showing of bad faith, malice, or corrupt motive.
3. Judge Generosa C. Labra was found NOT ADMINISTRATIVELY LIABLE. Her denial of the Motion to Dismiss was a judicial act within her discretion, and her subsequent voluntary inhibition from the case negated any allegation of bias or partiality.
4. Clerk of Court Jeoffrey S. Joaquino was found guilty of Simple Neglect of Duty and fined P5,000. As Ex-Officio Sheriff, he failed to submit the required periodic reports on the implementation of the writ of execution within the 30-day period as mandated by Section 14, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. This constituted a violation of his duty under the 2002 Manual for Clerks of Court.
5. Sheriff El Cid R. Caballes was found guilty of Simple Neglect of Duty and fined P5,000. As the implementing sheriff, he likewise failed to submit the required periodic returns/reports on the writ of execution every 30 days until its full satisfaction, in violation of Section 14, Rule 39.
6. Sheriff Fortunato T. Viovicente, Jr. was found NOT ADMINISTRATIVELY LIABLE. The complaint against him was based on his implementation of the Writ of Possession issued by the Quezon City court, which was a lawful order. No abuse of authority was proven.
The Court emphasized that judges must exhibit competence and diligence, and any act contrary to law and settled jurisprudence constitutes gross ignorance. Court personnel, particularly those tasked with implementing writs, must strictly comply with procedural rules, including the submission of timely returns and reports. The Court also granted complainant’s prayer for a change of venue, ordering the transfer of Civil Case No. CEB-32893 from Cebu City to a court in Metro Manila to avoid a miscarriage of justice.