G.R. No. 140162 ; November 22, 2000
AYALA LAND, INC., petitioner, vs. SPOUSES MORRIS CARPO and SOCORRO CARPO, respondents.

FACTS

The spouses Carpo filed an action for quieting of title against Ayala Land, Inc. (ALI) over a parcel of land in Las Piñas. The Regional Trial Court rendered a summary judgment in favor of the Carpos, declaring their title superior and ordering the annulment of ALI’s derivative titles. ALI filed a notice of appeal and paid ₱415.00 for docket and other fees as assessed by the trial court’s cash clerk. The Court of Appeals dismissed ALI’s appeal because the payment was ₱5.00 short of the correct amount. ALI paid the deficiency and moved for reconsideration, but the appellate court denied the motion. ALI then filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing ALI’s appeal for failure to pay the full amount of docket fees.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of ALI and reversed the dismissal. The Court held that while the payment of full docket fees within the reglementary period is jurisdictional, the appellate court retains discretion under Rule 50, Section 1(c) of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, which uses the permissive “may” for dismissal. This discretion must be exercised judiciously. Citing Segovia v. Barrios, the Court emphasized that where an appellant demonstrates a willingness to pay the correct fees from the outset but is prevented from doing so due to an error committed by a court officer, such as a clerk who miscalculates the amount, dismissal is too harsh a sanction. The principle that citizens may rely on the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duties applies. The Court found that ALI promptly paid the assessed amount and immediately settled the minimal deficiency upon discovery. Therefore, the dismissal was unjust, and the case was remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings on the merits.