G.R. No. L-22236 June 22, 1965
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, petitioner, vs. HON. GAUDENCIO CLORIBEL, as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, and RAILROAD UNPAID RETIREES UNION, INC., respondents.

FACTS

The Railroad Unpaid Retirees Union, Inc. (RURU) filed a mandamus case against the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) and the Manila Railroad Company (MRR) to compel payment of retirement benefits. After trial, the Court of First Instance of Manila rendered judgment ordering GSIS to pay. GSIS appealed to the Court of Appeals. Pending appeal, the parties entered into a compromise agreement, which the Court of Appeals approved. Later, RURU filed in the Court of First Instance a petition for execution of judgment to compel GSIS to pay differentials. The court, presided by Judge Gaudencio Cloribel, granted execution. GSIS filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. GSIS then filed a notice of appeal and appeal bond to elevate the case to the Supreme Court. RURU opposed the appeal, contending it was filed out of time and was defective. Judge Cloribel dismissed the appeal, citing four reasons: (1) the notice of appeal failed to state it was based purely on questions of law; (2) the record on appeal was not filed on time; (3) interpretation of the compromise agreement is not a pure question of law; and (4) even considering it a mandamus appeal not requiring a record on appeal, it was not taken within 15 days. GSIS filed the instant petition for certiorari, mandamus, and prohibition.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of First Instance (Judge Cloribel) erred in dismissing GSIS’s appeal from the order granting execution of judgment.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition for mandamus and ordered the appeal to be certified and elevated to it. The Court held:
1. The appeal was in an incident of a mandamus case; thus, the period to appeal was 15 days from notice, and no record on appeal was required.
2. GSIS timely perfected its appeal. It received the order on July 16, 1963, filed a motion for reconsideration on July 19 (3 days), received the denial on August 15, and filed the notice of appeal on August 27 (12 days), totaling the 15-day reglementary period. The motion for reconsideration, based on the ground that findings were not supported by evidence, suspended the period to appeal.
3. By appealing directly to the Supreme Court, GSIS was deemed to waive the right to dispute findings of fact, making the only question one of law; thus, there was no need to expressly state the appeal was based purely on questions of law.
4. Mandamus is the proper remedy to compel the judge to give due course to a timely appeal. The right to determine if an appeal is dilatory rests with the appellate court, not the court a quo.
The preliminary injunction was made permanent, subject to the ultimate decision on the appeal. No costs.