G.R. No. L-11787; November 28, 1958
THE SHERIFF OF THE CITY OF MANILA, plaintiff-interpleader, vs. ANGEL JOSE REALTY CORPORATION, INC., defendant-appellant. SOLEDAD ALCONCEL and WILHELMINA CARLOS, defendants-appellees.

FACTS

The Sheriff of Manila filed an interpleader action to resolve conflicting claims over the sum of P783.85 in his possession. The money came from the execution sale of movable properties belonging to Jose Romualdez, located in his rented apartment at the Teodorica Apartments owned by Angel Jose Realty Corporation, Inc. Defendants-appellees Soledad Alconcel and Wilhelmina Carlos claimed the entire amount by virtue of a writ of execution issued on September 10, 1955, in Criminal Case No. 13731, based on a judgment against Romualdez arising from a counter-bond they had executed in his favor. Defendant-appellant Angel Jose Realty Corporation, Inc. claimed the same amount as unpaid rentals for Romualdez’s apartment covering July to September 1955. After the sheriff denied its petition to intervene, the realty corporation secured a judgment against Romualdez for the back rentals in the Manila municipal court, and a corresponding writ of execution was issued on March 10, 1956. The lower court ruled in favor of Alconcel and Carlos, holding that their claim, based on the earlier writ (September 10, 1955), enjoyed preference over the realty corporation’s subsequent claim (March 10, 1956) under Article 2244(7) of the Civil Code.

ISSUE

Which claim has priority over the sum of P783.85—the judgment credit of Alconcel and Carlos (based on an earlier writ of execution) or the claim of Angel Jose Realty Corporation for unpaid rentals?

RULING

The Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision and ruled in favor of Angel Jose Realty Corporation, Inc. The Court held that Article 2241 of the Civil Code, not Article 2244, governs the case because the disputed funds were proceeds from the sale of specific movable property of the debtor (Romualdez). Under Article 2241(12), credits for rent for one year upon the personal property of the lessee existing on the leased immovable are preferred. The realty corporation’s claim is for unpaid rentals, and the money came from the sale of movables found in the debtor’s rented apartment. Therefore, even though Alconcel and Carlos’s writ of execution was issued earlier, the realty corporation’s claim for rentals enjoys a specific preference under Article 2241(12). The Court cited the precedent of Mcmicking vs. Padern, Moreno, Jimenez and Co., which similarly gave preference to a claim for rents over an earlier judgment credit. The sheriff was ordered to deliver the amount to Angel Jose Realty Corporation, Inc.