Manuel Co Keng Kian v. Honorable Intermediate Appellate Court (Fourth Special Cases Division) and Plaza Arcade, Inc.
NEW DOCTRINEFacts
The Antecedents: Private respondent Plaza Arcade, Inc. filed a complaint for ejectment against petitioner Manuel Co Keng Kian for refusing to vacate leased premises despite the expiration of the lease contract and receipt of several letters of demand, the last of which was sent by registered mail. Procedural History: The Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) dismissed the ejectment case for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the demand letters were not validly served personally, by written notice to a person on the premises, or by posting, as required by Section 2, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) initially reversed this but affirmed the dismissal on reconsideration. The Intermediate Appellate Court (IAC) overturned the RTC's dismissal, stating that the lower courts took a constricted view of the rule and failed to consider the common practice of serving notices by registered mail. This Court granted a petition for review on certiorari. The Petition: The legal issue presented is whether a notice to vacate required in ejectment cases can be served by registered mail.
Issue(s)
Whether the notice to vacate required to be served on a lessee under Section 2, Rule 70 of the Revised Rules of Court may be validly served by registered mail.
Ruling
The petition is denied for lack of merit. The assailed decision of the Court of Appeals reversing the dismissal order of the trial court is affirmed. Civil Case No. 071279-CV is ordered reinstated in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, Branch 7. The decision is immediately executory.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court held that service of a notice to vacate via registered mail satisfies the jurisdictional requirements of Section 2, Rule 70 of the Revised Rules of Court. The Court reasoned that the enumerated modes of service in the Rule should not be viewed so constrictedly as to exclude common practices like registered mail, which provides a return card as evidence of delivery. It was emphasized that the summary nature of ejectment actions necessitates a realistic approach where social order is restored promptly without undue reliance on technicalities that cause delay. The Court noted that service by registered mail is effective and cannot be avoided by the lessee's simple expediency of declining to accept delivery; such service is deemed complete five days after the first notice if the addressee fails to claim the mail. In this case, the petitioner's refusal to acknowledge multiple demand letters constituted a blatant attempt at evasion that the Court would not countenance. Therefore, so long as the lessee or his agent personally receives the written demand, the method of conveyance—whether by messenger, attorney, or postman—is immaterial to the validity of the notice.
Main Doctrine
Notice to vacate in ejectment cases may be served by registered mail as substantial compliance with the modes of service enumerated under Section 2, Rule 70 of the Revised Rules of Court, especially when the lessee's refusal to accept personal service is evident.