GR L 12769; (August, 1917) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-12769; August 3, 1917
Case Title: FLORENCIO YULO and GREGORIO SAJO, petitioners, vs. JOHN S. POWELL, judge of first instance of Iloilo, CONSOLACION JAVELONA Y LOPEZ and BLAS MONTECLARO, respondents.
FACTS:
1. On May 22, 1913, respondents Consolacion Javelona y Lopez and Blas Monteclaro filed an action in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Iloilo against petitioner Florencio Yulo to recover possession of a parcel of land and damages for its illegal use and occupation.
2. On October 21, 1913, the CFI rendered judgment in favor of the respondents, awarding them possession of the land and damages amounting to P2,734.50.
3. Yulo appealed to the Supreme Court. On September 3, 1915, the Supreme Court affirmed the award of possession but reduced the damages to P2,052.
4. The Supreme Court’s judgment became final and was returned to the lower court for execution, which was duly carried out.
5. On March 12, 1917, upon motion of the respondents, the CFI issued another execution to recover an additional sum of P1,455, representing the alleged value of the use and occupation of the land for the agricultural years 1914 and 1915.
6. No court had rendered any judgment for this additional amount of P1,455.
7. Yulo moved to declare this execution null and void for lack of jurisdiction, but the CFI denied his motion on March 24, 1917.
8. Yulo and Gregorio Sajo (the latter presumably joined as a party affected) then filed the present petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court.
ISSUE:
Whether the Court of First Instance has jurisdiction to issue a writ of execution for the recovery of a sum of money for which no final judgment has been rendered.
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court granted the petition and annulled the writ of execution.
The Court held that under Section 443 of Act No. 190 (the Code of Procedure in Civil Actions), a writ of execution may only be issued by the party in whose favor a judgment is given, and only within five years after its entry. There is no provision authorizing the issuance of an execution except upon a final judgment or decree. An execution is a remedy for the enforcement of a judgment and cannot be lawfully issued unless it is based on a final judgment rendered by a competent court after the parties have been given an opportunity to be heard. Since no judgment existed for the sum of P1,455, the CFI acted without jurisdiction in issuing the execution. The execution was therefore null and void. Costs were adjudged against the private respondents.
This is AI (Gemini and Deepseek) Generated. Please Double Check. Powered by Armztrong.