G.R. No. L-47688. November 24, 1941.
BASILIA CABRERA, as administratrix of the intestate estate of the deceased Nemesio Cabrera, plaintiff and appellant, vs. PHILIPPINE EDUCATION CO., INC., defendant and appellee.

FACTS

The case involves Civil Case No. 6189 (foreclosure of mortgage) and Civil Case No. 2432 (detention) filed by Philippine Education Co., Inc. against the deceased Nemesio Cabrera and Artemio Fule. The mortgaged property in Case No. 6189 was sold at public auction and adjudicated to the mortgagee-creditor (Philippine Education Co.). As the judgment debtors refused to deliver possession, the company filed the detention case (No. 2432) in the Justice of the Peace Court of San Pablo, Laguna. The Justice of the Peace Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, ordering the defendants to deliver possession. On July 21, 1936, Basilia Cabrera, as administratrix of Nemesio Cabrera’s estate, filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of Laguna against Philippine Education Co., seeking to annul all proceedings in Cases No. 6189 and 2432, alleging that both courts lacked jurisdiction to hear and decide the matters. The Court of First Instance ruled against her, and upon appeal, the Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court due to jurisdictional questions.

ISSUE

The primary issues are: (1) Whether the defendants (Nemesio Cabrera and Artemio Fule) were legally summoned in both Case No. 6189 and Case No. 2432; and (2) Whether the judgment in Case No. 2432 is null because it was based on a confession of judgment signed only by Artemio Fule for himself and purportedly for Nemesio Cabrera.

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled against the appellant, Basilia Cabrera. On the first issue, the Court found that the defendants were substantially and duly summoned in accordance with law. In Case No. 6189, the summons was received at the sheriff’s office by Attorney Demetrio Hernandez, who represented himself as counsel for the defendants and subsequently appeared and answered the complaint on their behalf. In Case No. 2432, the summons was personally delivered by a policeman to the defendants, though they refused to sign the copies, stating they wished to consult their lawyer. The trial court correctly held that the summons were valid.
On the second issue, the Court found that although there was no direct proof, the facts and circumstances indicated that the confession of judgment in Case No. 2432 was presented with the acquiescence of Nemesio Cabrera. Artemio Fule, his son-in-law and co-defendant, lived with him in the same house. Cabrera knew about the foreclosure action, its outcome, the auction sale, and the adjudication of the property to the creditor. Fule signed the confession of judgment for himself and for Cabrera on the day of the hearing in the Justice of the Peace Court. Furthermore, the creditor, at Fule’s request, had agreed to give them an opportunity to redeem the property. These circumstances created a presumption that Nemesio Cabrera had knowledge of and assented to Fule’s actions regarding the proceedings in Case No. 2432.
The Supreme Court declared that the proceedings in both Case No. 6189 of the Court of First Instance of Laguna and Case No. 2432 of the Justice of the Peace Court of San Pablo were in accordance with law. The appealed judgment was affirmed in all respects, with costs against the appellant.