G.R. No. L-19651 June 30, 1966
ALLIED FREE WORKERS’ UNION (PLUM), SALVADOR T. LLUCH, MARIANO LL. BADELLES, NICANOR HALIBAS and LAURENTINO LL. BADELLES, petitioners, vs. HON. JUDGE MANUEL ESTIPONA, Court of First Instance of Lanao del Norte, THE SHERIFF OF ILIGAN CITY and THE COMPAÑIA MARITIMA OF ILIGAN CITY, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari, etc., seeking to restrain the Court of First Instance of Lanao del Norte and the Sheriff of Iligan City from executing the court’s decision dated December 5, 1960, in Civil Case No. 577, as corrected by an “Amended Corrected Decision” served on January 11, 1961, and its order dated March 24, 1962, providing for execution. The decision declared an arrastre and stevedoring contract terminated, awarded damages totaling P520,000.00 to respondent Compañia Maritima, and issued a permanent injunction against the petitioners. On December 17, 1960, petitioners moved for reconsideration. While this motion was pending, on January 6, 1961, they filed a notice of appeal, an appeal bond, and on January 10, 1961, their record on appeal. On January 11, 1961, the respondent judge issued an order serving an “Amended Corrected Decision” to correct “errata and omissions” in the original. Subsequently, the respondent court, on March 24, 1962, ruled that the “Amended Corrected Decision” of January 11, 1961, had superseded the original and, as no appeal was taken from it, had become final and executory, ordering issuance of a writ of execution. Petitioners contend this deprived them of their right to appeal from the original decision.

ISSUE

Which is the true appealable decision in Civil Case No. 577: the original decision of December 5, 1960, or the “Amended Corrected Decision” of January 11, 1961?

RULING

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the petitioners. The “Amended Corrected Decision” was merely a correction of “errata and omissions” in the original decision and did not supersede it. Since petitioners had already filed their motion for reconsideration, notice of appeal, appeal bond, and record on appeal from the December 5, 1960 decision before the corrected version was served, their appeal steps were timely. The respondent court’s order of March 24, 1962, declaring the corrected decision final and executory, and the subsequent writ of execution, were declared void. The respondent court was ordered to hold a hearing for the approval, disapproval, or amendment of the record on appeal tendered by petitioners. Costs were awarded against the respondents, except the respondent judge.