GR L 5685; (February, 1954) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-5685 February 25, 1954
Ireneo Mirafuentes, et al., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. Victorio Sabellano, Cristino G. Abasolo and Teofilo M. Pereyra, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
In a prior civil case (No. 817), the plaintiffs (the Mirafuenteses) obtained a decision against defendant Victorio Sabellano, declaring their right to redeem a parcel of land by paying him P1,000 and ordering Sabellano to execute a deed of resale upon such payment. To stay the execution of this decision pending appeal, Sabellano filed a supersedeas bond for P6,000, with Cristino G. Abasolo and Teofilo Pereyra as sureties. The bond was conditioned for the payment of any sum due upon affirmance of the judgment. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision in toto. Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a new complaint against Sabellano and his sureties (Abasolo and Pereyra) to recover P6,000 as damages for Sabellano’s use and occupation of the land during the appeal period. The trial court rendered a decision holding the defendants jointly and severally liable for P2,000, ruling that the supersedeas bond covered such damages.
ISSUE
Whether the sureties on the supersedeas bond are liable for damages arising from the defendant’s use and occupation of the property during the appeal, when the affirmed judgment did not award any such damages or costs.
RULING
No. The appealed decision is reversed and the defendants are absolved from the complaint. The liability under a supersedeas bond filed to stay execution is strictly limited to the performance of the judgment or order appealed from, in case it is affirmed. The bond in question was conditioned for the payment of any sum due by reason of the affirmance of the decision. Since the affirmed decision in the prior case did not award any damages or costs to the plaintiffs, and it is admitted that said decision had been fully executed, there remained no sum due from the principal debtor (Sabellano) under that judgment. Consequently, no liability attached to his sureties. The bond’s liability is judicial, not contractual, and is confined to the adjudication in the case where it was filed. The provision for execution on the bond after the case is remanded assumes the liability arises from the appealed judgment itself.