G.R. No. 76209 May 4, 1989
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and FIDELA DEL CASTILLO, married to EULALIO MISTICA, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Fidela Del Castillo filed an Amended Application for Registration of Title over three parcels of land in Meycauayan, Bulacan, claiming possession for over thirty years. The Court of First Instance (CFI) of Bulacan issued an Order dated June 21, 1977, granting the Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), fifteen days to file a written opposition. This order was received by the OSG on June 27, 1977. The OSG filed its written opposition on July 15, 1977, which was three days beyond the July 12, 1977 deadline if reckoned from the OSG’s receipt. The CFI, in an Order dated July 19, 1977, declared the Republic in default for failure to comply timely.
The Republic filed a Motion to Set Aside the Order of Default, arguing the delay was due to excusable negligence as it awaited reports from land agencies and that its opposition raised meritorious defenses, including that the lands were within an unclassified forest region and thus beyond the court’s jurisdiction. The CFI denied the motion and subsequent reconsideration. The Court of Appeals affirmed, ruling the 15-day period started to run from June 21, 1977, when an Assistant Provincial Fiscal was present in court and notified, making the opposition nine days late.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in denying the Motion to Set Aside the Order of Default.

RULING

The Supreme Court granted the petition, setting aside the appellate decision and ordering the trial court to proceed with the merits. The legal logic is twofold. First, the Court corrected the computation of the reglementary period. The period to file an opposition must be reckoned from the counsel of record’s receipt of the order. Here, the OSG was the counsel of record, not the Assistant Provincial Fiscal whose appearance was limited. The OSG received the order on June 27, 1977, making the July 15 filing only three days late, not nine.
Second, the Court emphasized liberality in setting aside orders of default to serve substantial justice. The delay was minimal and explained by the OSG’s wait for agency reports. More critically, the Republic’s opposition raised a highly meritorious and jurisdictional defense—that the lands were forest lands, incapable of private ownership and beyond the court’s authority to adjudicate. Default judgments are disfavored, especially when the defendant has a prima facie valid defense, no hearing on the merits had occurred, and no prejudice would result to the applicant from allowing the opposition. Technicalities should not prevail over due process, particularly when the government’s interest in preserving inalienable public domain is at stake.