G.R. No. 144813 ; August 15, 2001
GOLD LINE TRANSIT, INC., petitioner, vs. LUISA RAMOS, respondent.

FACTS

On January 4, 1993, a collision occurred between a passenger jeepney and a bus owned by petitioner Gold Line Transit, Inc. (GOLDLINE), resulting in the death of Leonisa Ramos, daughter of respondent Luisa Ramos. Respondent filed a Complaint for Damages against GOLDLINE and its driver on March 16, 1994. GOLDLINE filed an Answer denying liability and filed a Third-Party Complaint against the jeepney driver and its insurer. During the pre-trial on August 29, 1997, GOLDLINE and its counsel, Atty. Leovigildo H. Mijares III, failed to appear. The trial court declared GOLDLINE in default and allowed respondent to present evidence ex-parte. On September 30, 1998, the trial court rendered a judgment against GOLDLINE. A copy of the decision was furnished to defendant’s counsel on November 20, 1998. The decision became final and executory, and a writ of execution was issued. On April 8, 1999, GOLDLINE, through Atty. Mijares, filed a Petition for Relief from Judgment, alleging that counsel only learned of the decision in March 1999 due to a change of office address which he failed to notify the court about. The trial court denied the petition for being filed beyond the reglementary period, noting counsel received the decision on November 20, 1998, making the 60-day period expire on January 20, 1999. The Court of Appeals dismissed GOLDLINE’s petition for certiorari, sustaining the trial court’s orders. GOLDLINE filed the instant petition, arguing it only learned of the decision on March 30, 1999, making its April 8, 1999 petition timely, and questioning the receipt of the decision based on irregularities in the return card.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in sustaining the denial of GOLDLINE’s Petition for Relief from Judgment for being filed out of time.

RULING

The petition is denied. The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ Decision and Resolution, which sustained the trial court’s orders. The Court held that a petition for relief from judgment under Section 3, Rule 38 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure must be filed within sixty (60) days after the petitioner learns of the judgment and not more than six (6) months after such judgment was entered. Strict compliance with these periods is required. The trial court found that GOLDLINE’s counsel received a copy of the decision on November 20, 1998. This finding was uncontroverted. Therefore, the petition for relief filed on April 8, 1999, was filed beyond the 60-day period which expired on January 20, 1999. The negligence of counsel in failing to notify the court of his change of address is inexcusable. The presumption that an official duty has been regularly performed applies to the service of the decision by mail. The negligence of counsel binds the client, and a client cannot be relieved from the consequences of counsel’s mistake or negligence. The Court emphasized the duty of lawyers to inform the court of their correct address and that litigation must end at some definite time.