G.R. No. L-13242; July 31, 1958
LEON REFORMA, petitioner, vs. MACARIO DE LUNA, respondent.

FACTS

In the November 8, 1955 election for Mayor of Catanauan, Quezon, Leon Reforma was proclaimed winner over Macario de Luna by 27 votes. De Luna filed an election protest. The trial court, after revision of ballots, declared Reforma the winner by 30 votes. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision and declared De Luna the winner by 12 votes. The Court of Appeals counted in favor of De Luna thirty-three (33) ballots where his name (“Luna”) was not written in the space for Mayor but in spaces for other offices (e.g., Senator, Governor, Provincial Board Member, Councilor). During the revision, these ballots were objected to by Reforma’s counsel on that specific ground and were marked as exhibits, but De Luna did not initially claim them as valid votes. At a subsequent hearing, Reforma’s counsel failed to appear, and the trial court issued an order considering the case submitted for decision based on protestant’s evidence. Later that day, counsel moved for reconsideration citing a train derailment, but the court did not rule on the motion and later rendered its decision. The trial court did not count the 33 ballots for De Luna, stating that because Reforma defaulted, no evidence was introduced to show why they were objected to, so it relied on the election returns. On appeal, De Luna claimed these ballots, and the Court of Appeals held that since Reforma failed to formally present them as evidence during trial, all ballots found in the valid boxes by the revision committee must be adjudicated to the party for whom they were cast. Reforma filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied, prompting this petition for review.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in counting the thirty-three (33) ballots as valid votes for respondent De Luna, despite the name “Luna” being written in spaces for offices other than Mayor, on the ground that petitioner Reforma failed to formally present them as evidence during trial.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The thirty-three (33) ballots are illegal and void as votes for De Luna for the office of Mayor because his name was written in spaces for other offices, in violation of Section 149, paragraph 13 of the Revised Election Code (any vote for a candidate for an office for which he did not present himself is void and a stray vote). The Court held that the trial court and the Court of Appeals had the ministerial duty to examine these ballots motu proprio and reject them as stray votes for the office of Mayor, regardless of whether they were formally offered as evidence. The report of the revision commissioners and the ballots themselves are automatically before the court as evidence by legal mandate (Sections 175-177, Revised Election Code). The court must determine the legality of ballots based on the commissioners’ report and the ballots, without the need for formal offer. Since De Luna never claimed these ballots in the trial court and their invalidity is apparent on their face, they should not have been counted for him. Deducting these 33 votes from De Luna’s total, Reforma obtained 1,604 votes against De Luna’s 1,583 votes, giving Reforma a majority of 21 votes. Petitioner Leon Reforma is declared the mayor-elect of Catanauan, Quezon.