AM P 02 1612; (January, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. P-02-1612; January 31, 2006
Conrado E. Cobarrubias, Complainant, vs. Arniel S. Apostol, Sheriff III, Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 51, Caloocan City, Respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Conrado E. Cobarrubias obtained a favorable judgment and a writ of execution against defendant Renato Caling. Respondent Sheriff Arniel S. Apostol levied on a property and scheduled an auction sale. A third-party claim was filed, prompting the sheriff to require an indemnity bond, which complainant posted. Respondent then re-scheduled the sale for March 15, 2001. However, one day prior, the third-party claimant filed an Omnibus Motion to Quash the Writ. Despite the absence of any court order suspending the sale, respondent Sheriff unilaterally failed to conduct the auction as scheduled. Complainant also alleged that respondent received excessive sheriff’s fees totaling P16,655.00, a claim respondent denied, asserting he only received P2,500.00 for expenses.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Sheriff is administratively liable for his failure to proceed with the auction sale and for allegedly receiving unauthorized fees.
RULING
Yes, respondent Sheriff is administratively liable. The execution of a writ is a ministerial duty. The filing of a third-party claim, once an indemnity bond is posted by the judgment creditor, does not justify the sheriff’s inaction. The subsequent filing of an Omnibus Motion, without a restraining order from the court, likewise did not authorize respondent to suspend the sale. His duty was to proceed unless expressly enjoined. His inaction constituted a willful refusal to perform an official duty. Regarding the fees, while the Court found the evidence insufficient to conclusively prove the exact amount received, respondent’s own admission of receiving P2,500.00 without providing a detailed accounting or official receipt violated proper procedure. Sheriffs must provide a detailed breakdown of expenses and issue official receipts for any amount received. His failure to do so compounds his administrative infraction. For refusal to perform official duty, respondent is SUSPENDED for six months without pay.