Dela Cruz v. Dela Cruz
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: In Civil Case No. U-649, a judgment was rendered on June 1, 1965. A copy was received by defendants' counsel, Atty. Antonio M. Belen, on August 5, 1965. Atty. Belen filed a motion for reconsideration by registered mail on August 27, 1965, which was received by the court on August 30, 1965. The motion was denied in an order dated September 21, 1965, a copy of which was sent by registered mail to Atty. Belen on September 30, 1965. This mail was received at the Dagupan City post office on October 1, 1965, but was returned to the sender (trial court) and received at the Urdaneta post office on November 3, 1965, with notations "R & S" and "unclaimed," and stamped "2nd notice" and "Last Notice" with check marks. Procedural History: A "2nd true copy" of the September 21, 1965 order was sent by registered mail on November 28, 1965, and received by "N.R. Belen" on January 5, 1966. On January 2, 1976, plaintiffs filed a complaint for revival of judgment, alleging the judgment became final and executory on January 23, 1966. Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing prescription under Article 1144 of the Civil Code. The trial court granted the motion on March 22, 1976, finding the judgment became final on November 23, 1965. The Petition: Plaintiffs appealed, arguing the lower court erred in dismissing the complaint for revival of judgment on the ground of prescription and in concluding the decision became final on November 23, 1965.
Issue(s)
Whether the service of the order denying the motion for reconsideration by registered mail was complete and effective. Whether the judgment sought to be revived had prescribed.
Ruling
The appealed order of March 22, 1976, is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. A new order is rendered denying the motion to dismiss the complaint. Defendants are given fifteen (15) days from notice to file an answer, and the trial court is directed to terminate the proceedings with deliberate dispatch. The judgment is immediately executory.
Ratio Decidendi
On the completeness of service by registered mail: The Court held that service by registered mail is complete upon actual receipt by the addressee, as shown by the registry return card. An exception exists where the addressee fails to claim the mail within five days from the postmaster's first notice; in such cases, service takes effect at the expiration of that period. However, the application of this exception requires conclusive proof that the first notice was sent and delivered to the addressee. The notations "R & S" and "unclaimed" on the returned envelope, along with stamped "2nd notice" and "Last Notice," are insufficient to establish that the first notice was actually sent and received by the addressee's counsel. The trial court's reliance on these notations to presume constructive service was untenable. To avoid injustice, the party relying on constructive service must present clear proof, such as a postmaster's certification, detailing how, when, and to whom the first notice was delivered. The mere presentation of the envelope with "unclaimed" notations does not suffice. Therefore, the service of the order denying the motion for reconsideration was not complete until actual receipt by counsel on January 5, 1966. On the prescription of the action for revival of judgment: Since the service of the order denying the motion for reconsideration was only completed on January 5, 1966, the judgment did not become final and executory on November 23, 1965, as found by the trial court. Instead, the defendants had twenty (20) days from January 5, 1966, to file an appeal or motion for reconsideration, meaning the judgment became final and executory on January 25, 1966. The complaint for revival of judgment was filed on January 2, 1976, which is well within the ten (10) year reglementary period provided by Article 1144 of the Civil Code. Consequently, the action had not prescribed.
Main Doctrine
Service by registered mail is complete upon actual receipt by the addressee. If the addressee fails to claim the mail within five days from the postmaster's first notice, service takes effect at the expiration of that period, but only if there is conclusive proof that the first notice was sent and delivered to the addressee. Mere notations on the returned envelope are insufficient to establish proof of notice.