GR L 2672; (December, 1949) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-2672 December 13, 1949
UNIVERSITY OF SANTO TOMAS, petitioner, vs. BUENAVENTURA OCAMPO, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, DIONISIO PABILOÑA and YU TUY (alias YU BONTOY), respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner University of Santo Tomas (UST) obtained a judgment in the Municipal Court of Manila against respondents for unlawful detainer, ordering them to vacate the premises and pay accrued rents and damages. Respondents appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI) and filed a supersedeas bond to stay execution. UST moved for immediate execution in the CFI, arguing respondents failed to pay or deposit the rent for September 1948 by the 10th of October as required. The respondent judge denied the motion, holding that the September rent was covered by the supersedeas bond. Respondents had been depositing subsequent months’ rents with the clerk of court.
ISSUE
Whether, in an unlawful detainer case on appeal, the defendant-appellant must pay or deposit only the rentals accruing after the perfection of the appeal, provided the rentals accruing prior thereto are covered by the supersedeas bond.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court, citing Aylon vs. Jugo, held that to prevent execution during the pendency of an appeal, only rentals accruing after the perfection of the appeal need be paid to the plaintiff or deposited with the CFI. The unpaid rentals that had accrued before the appeal are guaranteed by the supersedeas bond filed in the municipal court. Since the rent for September 1948 had largely accrued before the appeal was perfected and docketed in the CFI, and the supersedeas bond approved by the municipal court included it, the respondent judge correctly denied the motion for execution. The petition for mandamus was denied.
AI Generated by Armztrong.