GR L 24672; (August, 1966) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-24672; August 12, 1966
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. MODESTO R. RAMOLETE in his capacity as Judge of the Court of First Instance of Cebu and QUIRICO DEL MAR, respondents.
FACTS
Quirico Del Mar filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Cebu against the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) to compel payment of his back pensions, which were discontinued after the PVA learned he was receiving a similar pension from the United States Government, and to claim damages. The PVA, represented by the Solicitor General, answered that the petition was premature due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies and that it was essentially a money claim against the Republic. After trial, the court ordered the PVA to pay Del Mar. The Solicitor General received the decision on March 9, 1965, and on March 16, mailed a notice of appeal to the Supreme Court. On April 14, Del Mar moved for execution, arguing the appeal period lapsed without the PVA filing an appeal bond. The PVA opposed, claiming exemption as a government agency exercising governmental functions. The respondent court, on April 30, 1965, held the PVA was not exempt and must file a bond. The PVA subsequently tendered a check for the bond on May 19. However, on May 15, 1965, the court declared the judgment final and ordered execution. The Republic filed this petition for certiorari and mandamus, alleging grave abuse of discretion.
ISSUE
Is the Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) exempt from the filing of an appeal bond?
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition. It held that the PVA is an agency or instrumentality of the Republic of the Philippines, created by law (Republic Act 2664) to administer all benefits due to veterans, their heirs, or beneficiaries, and exercises governmental functions. A suit against such an agency, where the money involved is part of public funds, is a suit against the Government itself. Therefore, the PVA is exempt from filing an appeal bond. The notice of appeal filed by the Solicitor General within the reglementary period perfected the appeal. The respondent court erred in holding otherwise. The orders of April 30 and May 15, 1965, were set aside, and the respondent court was ordered to certify the records on appeal to the proper appellate court.