G.R. No. L-6552; July 31, 1954
JULITA R. VILLAREAL, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. JUAN FRANCO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On June 3, 1952, spouses Julita R. Villareal and Jose O. Villareal filed a case in the Municipal Court of Manila against Juan Franco to recover P1,225.97 plus interest, P300 in damages for collection expenses and attorney’s fees, and costs. The municipal court rendered judgment on June 23, 1952, ordering Franco to pay P930 and P335.70 with interest and costs. Franco appealed to the Court of First Instance of Manila. The plaintiffs moved to dismiss the appeal, which the court initially denied on November 7, 1952, but upon reconsideration, granted on November 18, 1952, dismissing the appeal and remanding the case to the municipal court for execution. Franco appealed this dismissal order.
The sequence of events regarding notice is: On July 22, 1952, the municipal court issued a writ of execution on plaintiffs’ motion; a copy was served personally on Franco on July 30, 1952, but the writ was returned unsatisfied on August 3, 1952. On August 13, 1952, the plaintiffs filed an administrative complaint against Franco (a civil service employee) with the Commissioner of Civil Service, annexing a copy of the judgment and the sheriff’s return. Franco acknowledged receipt of this complaint and its annexes on or before August 14, 1952. On August 28, 1952, the clerk of the municipal court mailed a copy of the judgment to Franco, who claimed non-receipt. On September 27, 1952, Franco moved to set aside the writ of execution, which was granted on October 1, 1952. On October 10, 1952, Franco filed his notice of appeal, appeal bond, and deposited the docket fees.

ISSUE

Whether the judgment of the municipal court had become final and executory prior to Franco’s appeal, thereby rendering his appeal untimely.

RULING

Yes, the judgment had become final and executory. The appeal was dismissed and the order of the Court of First Instance was affirmed.
The Supreme Court held that under Rule 40, Section 2 of the Rules of Court, an appeal from an inferior court must be perfected within fifteen days after notification of the judgment. While the Rules do not explicitly prescribe the manner of service for judgments of inferior courts, Franco had actual notice of the judgment well beyond the fifteen-day period. Specifically, he received a copy of the writ of execution (which set forth the gist of the decision) on July 30, 1952, and a copy of the judgment itself as an annex to the administrative complaint on or before August 14, 1952. Even if Section 7 of Rule 27 (requiring personal or registered mail service for final judgments) were applied—though it is part of the rules for Courts of First Instance and its applicability to inferior courts is questionable—service by mail of the judgment on August 28, 1952, would be deemed complete five days later, around September 3 or 4, 1952, under Section 8 of Rule 27. Franco’s notice of appeal filed on October 10, 1952, was filed more than fifteen days after any of these dates of notification. Therefore, the judgment was final and executory when he appealed, making his appeal untimely.