A.M. No. MTJ-08-1695; April 16, 2008
Julianito M. Salvador, complainant, vs. Judge Manuel Q. Limsiaco, Jr. and John O. Negroprado, Clerk of Court, both of the 4th MCTC, Valladolid-San Enrique-Pulupandan, Negros Occidental, respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Julianito M. Salvador filed an ejectment case on October 21, 2001, before the MCTC presided by respondent Judge Manuel Q. Limsiaco, Jr. After a hearing on February 13, 2002, the parties were ordered to submit position papers. Complainant submitted his on March 15, 2002, while the defendants failed to file theirs. Despite motions for early resolution, respondent judge did not act. The judge later required complainant to resubmit his position paper, claiming the original was lost. Complainant complied on November 4, 2002.
The judge rendered a decision dismissing the case only on May 21, 2003. Complainant appealed and discovered delays in transmitting the records to the RTC. The complaint was amended to include Clerk of Court John O. Negroprado for undue delay in transmitting the complete records and for failing to issue a certificate of completeness. Respondents denied the allegations, with Negroprado admitting he failed to issue the required certificate but claiming he transmitted the records on June 16, 2003.

ISSUE

Whether respondents are administratively liable for undue delay in rendering a decision and for delays in transmitting case records.

RULING

Yes, respondent judge is administratively liable. Under Rule 70, Section 11 of the Rules of Court, an ejectment case must be decided within 30 days from receipt of the position papers or the expiration of the period to file them. The period for filing expired on March 15, 2002, yet Judge Limsiaco rendered his decision only on May 21, 2003, a delay exceeding one year. This violates the constitutional mandate for lower courts to decide cases within 90 days from submission for decision. Such undue delay constitutes a less serious offense under Rule 140, Section 9(1) of the Rules of Court, as amended, undermining the right to a speedy disposition of cases and public confidence in the judiciary. The Court modified the OCA’s recommendation and imposed a fine of P20,000 on Judge Limsiaco.
Regarding Clerk of Court Negroprado, while insufficient evidence proved malicious retention of records, he admitted failing to immediately transmit the records and to issue a certificate of completeness. He is sternly warned to be more circumspect in his duties. The Court adopted the OCA’s findings with modification as to the penalty for the judge.