G.R. No. L-46248; May 27, 1939
TIMOTEO TAROMA, petitioner, vs. ROMAN A. CRUZ, Judge of First Instance of Ilocos Norte, and GERMAN GALINATO, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Timoteo Taroma received a copy of an adverse decision in a land registration case on April 5, 1938. He filed a motion for new trial on May 3, 1938, which was denied, and he was notified of the denial on May 18, 1938. He filed his bill of exceptions on May 21, 1938. The respondent judge refused to accept the bill of exceptions, ruling it was filed on the thirty-first day after notification of the decision, which was beyond the thirty-day appeal period under Section 14 of Act No. 496, as amended. Taroma filed this mandamus petition to compel the judge to accept the bill of exceptions and give due course to his appeal.

ISSUE

Whether the petitioner’s bill of exceptions was filed within the thirty-day appeal period, considering the time the court took to resolve the motion for new trial.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition. The Court held that the time consumed by the court in considering a motion for new trial should be excluded in computing the thirty-day period for perfecting an appeal. This rule, established in prior jurisprudence (e.g., Paez vs. Berenguer), applies notwithstanding the silence of the statute. Applying this exclusion, the period from the filing of the motion (May 3) until notification of its denial (May 18) is not counted. Thus, from April 5 (excluded) to May 3 (excluded), 27 days elapsed. From May 18 (excluded) to May 21 (included), 3 days elapsed, totaling 30 days. Therefore, the bill of exceptions was filed on time. The respondent judge was ordered to approve and forward the bill of exceptions to the Court of Appeals.