GR 111357; (June, 1997) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111357 June 17, 1997
TRADERS ROYAL BANK, petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, and HEIRS OF THE LATE JOSE C. TAYENGCO, respondents.
FACTS
The factual aspects of the case were previously resolved in G.R. No. 63855, which ruled the deceased spouses Jose and Salvacion Tayengco as the lawful owners of properties under receivership, and G.R. No. 60076, which affirmed the validity of the appointment of petitioner Traders Royal Bank (TRB) as receiver pendente lite. Following these rulings, the receivership proceeding was terminated. TRB rendered its final accounting of the funds under receivership, retaining the amount of P219,016.24 as its receiver’s fee instead of turning over the entire fund to the Tayengcos. The Regional Trial Court of Iloilo, Branch 5, approved this final accounting and the deduction of the fee in an order dated July 5, 1988. The Tayengcos assailed this order before the Court of Appeals, contending that TRB’s compensation should have been charged against the losing party and not from the funds under receivership. The Court of Appeals, in its decision dated February 12, 1993, ruled that TRB cannot deduct its fee from the receivership funds, ordering TRB to return the P219,016.24 to the Tayengcos and holding the losing parties, Cu Bie, et al., solely liable for TRB’s compensation. TRB’s motion for reconsideration was denied.
ISSUE
1. Whether the Court of Appeals decision dated February 12, 1993, is barred by res judicata by virtue of the Supreme Court’s ruling in G.R. No. 60076.
2. Who is responsible for TRB’s receiver’s fee?
RULING
1. No, the Court of Appeals decision is not barred by res judicata. The elements of res judicata are not present, as there is no identity of causes of action between G.R. No. 60076, which was a petition for annulment of a trial court order requiring Tayengco to render an accounting of rentals, and C.A. G.R. CV No. 21423, which was an appeal questioning the trial court order authorizing TRB to deduct its compensation from the receivership funds.
2. TRB’s receiver’s fee is to be charged against the defeated party or apportioned as justice requires, pursuant to Section 8, Rule 59 of the Rules of Court. The trial court’s order approving the deduction of TRB’s compensation solely from the funds under receivership was without legal justification. The Court of Appeals correctly reversed this order. The decision appealed from is AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.