G.R. No. L-25; September 14, 1945
NENA CARBONEL, petitioner, vs. FELIX PADILLA, ET AL., respondents.

FACTS

On April 18, 1945, respondent Felix Padilla filed an unlawful detainer case against petitioner Nena Carbonel in the Municipal Court of Manila. The court rendered a decision against Carbonel on April 26, 1945. Carbonel received a copy of the decision on May 10, 1945, and filed a motion for reconsideration and new trial on May 17, 1945. The municipal court denied this motion on May 22, 1945, without notifying Carbonel. On June 5, 1945, upon Padilla’s ex parte motion, the municipal court issued a writ of execution. Carbonel learned of this writ on June 9, 1945, and, having still received no notice of the denial of her motion, perfected her appeal on the same day by filing a notice of appeal and paying the required docket fees and appeal bond. The municipal court recalled the writ and remanded the case to the Court of First Instance (CFI). In the CFI, Padilla filed a motion to dismiss the appeal as out of time. The notice of this motion was sent to an incorrect address, so Carbonel was not notified. On July 9, 1945, without Carbonel having been heard, CFI Judge Pompeyo Diaz granted the motion, dismissed the appeal, and declared the municipal court’s decision final and executory. Carbonel’s subsequent motion to set aside this order was denied. The municipal court then issued a new order of execution.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent Judge Pompeyo Diaz was correct in dismissing Carbonel’s appeal as having been filed “out of time.”

RULING

No, the CFI order dismissing the appeal was erroneous and cannot be sustained. Under Section 2 and Section 4 of Rule 40 of the Rules of Court, an appeal must be perfected within fifteen days after notification of the judgment, and the time during which a motion for new trial is pending is deducted from this period. Notice of the denial of such a motion is essential, as it is the point from which the interrupted time for appeal begins to run again. In this case, Carbonel never received notice of the denial of her motion for new trial. She first learned of it upon being notified of the writ of execution on June 9, 1945, and she perfected her appeal immediately on that same date, which was within the reglementary period. Furthermore, the CFI acted on Padilla’s motion to dismiss the appeal without proof of due service to Carbonel, depriving her of her day in court. The order of the CFI dated July 9, 1945, and the consequent execution orders are set aside. The municipal court is ordered to remand the case record to the CFI, which is directed to try and decide the case on its merits. A separate motion by Carbonel’s counsel seeking action against Padilla’s lawyers for offensive language in their pleadings is denied, as the Court found insufficient grounds to grant it, though it noted such language should be avoided.