G.R. No. L-18686 January 24, 1967
CESARIO M. CLEMENTE, petitioner, vs. The Honorable COURT OF APPEALS, The Honorable MARIANO V. BENEDICTO, as Presiding Judge of the Court of First Instance of Masbate, PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF MASBATE and LOURDES PUIGCERVER, respondents.

FACTS

Respondent Lourdes Puigcerver owned a residential house built on public land in Masbate. On September 1, 1950, she leased the house to petitioner Cesario Clemente. On March 3, 1951, they entered into a contract of conditional sale of the house for P7,800.00. The contract stipulated that the unpaid balance of P5,000.00 would be paid by Clemente as soon as his application for sale of the land was approved. It further provided that if his application was disapproved, Clemente agreed to pay rental for the house from the contract date until he notified Puigcerver of the disapproval, with such rental to be deducted from the down payment. Clemente filed a Miscellaneous Sales Application (MSAV-11408) on March 3, 1951, which was disapproved on December 10, 1951. Puigcerver filed her own sales application (No. V-32946) on January 29, 1952. After conflicting applications, the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources ultimately rejected Clemente’s application and gave due course to Puigcerver’s in a January 1957 decision that became final. Due to Clemente’s refusal to pay rentals, Puigcerver filed an unlawful detainer action in the Justice of the Peace Court of Masbate. After judgment for Clemente, Puigcerver appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Masbate (Civil Case No. 820). The CFI decided in favor of Puigcerver on May 16, 1960, ordering Clemente to vacate, pay back rentals, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. The CFI judge ordered immediate execution on May 28, 1960, unless Clemente perfected an appeal and filed a supersedeas bond. Clemente vacated on May 31, 1960, but appealed to the Court of Appeals on June 10, 1960. Due to Clemente’s failure to file a supersedeas bond, the CFI issued an alias writ of execution on February 20, 1961 for back rentals, and the Court of Appeals issued a similar writ on April 25, 1961. Clemente filed the present petition for certiorari and mandamus to set aside the writs of execution, enjoin the sheriff, and restore his possession pending appeal.

ISSUE

1. Whether the Court of First Instance of Masbate had jurisdiction to try the unlawful detainer case on appeal, considering the question of title raised in Clemente’s answer.
2. Whether the CFI and the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the writs of execution.

RULING

1. The CFI of Masbate had jurisdiction. The Justice of the Peace Court’s jurisdiction was based on the recovery of physical possession, and the question of title raised in Clemente’s answer did not deprive it of jurisdiction. The contract of conditional sale became ineffective under its own terms upon the disapproval of Clemente’s sales application, a decision which became final in January 1957. Furthermore, the petition itself alleged that another action involving title to the same property was pending in the same CFI between the parties, indicating the ejectment case did not involve the question of title.
2. There was no grave abuse of discretion. Clemente failed to file the required supersedeas bond. The CFI had required the bond since May 28, 1960, and Clemente only filed a motion for leave to file such a bond on March 21, 1961, after the writ of execution had been issued. The denial of this motion was not a grave abuse of discretion. The orders complained of were in accordance with law.
The petition was dismissed, the preliminary injunction dissolved, and costs were imposed.