Antonio v. Wise and Company
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Wise and Company, Inc. initiated an action against Lim Heh Chio and his relatives for the recovery of P1,718.52. Summons were served by leaving copies at the defendants' usual place of abode, as Lim Heh Chio's residence was unknown and he could not be located. The sheriff was informed that Lim Heh Chio might be deceased, but without definite confirmation, he was summoned by publication. No defendants appeared, resulting in a default judgment. Subsequently, execution was levied upon two warehouses owned by Lim Heh Chio, which were sold at auction to Wise and Company, Inc. 2. Procedural History: Following the default judgment and execution sale, the sons of Lim Heh Chio made several unsuccessful attempts to regain possession of the properties. In October 1930, Efren A. Antonio, who had been appointed administrator of Lim Heh Chio's estate at the request of his sons, instituted the present proceeding. This action is an attempt to reopen the default judgment rendered in the original case. 3. The Petition: The petition is brought under section 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking relief from the default judgment. The petitioner argues that the sixty-day period for filing such a petition should commence from the date of his appointment as administrator, as he could not act prior to that. However, the Court finds that the heirs of Lim Heh Chio have long been aware of the judgment, and the appointment of an administrator does not reset the time limit. The petition is therefore denied as untimely.
Issue(s)
Whether the administrator, appointed after the judgment by default, can file a petition for relief under Section 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure when the heirs have long been aware of the judgment. Whether the sixty-day period for filing a petition for relief under Section 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure should be counted from the date of the administrator's appointment.
Ruling
The petition is denied with costs against the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether the administrator can file a petition for relief: The Court held that an action under Section 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure will not lie in this case. The section requires the petition to be presented within sixty days after the party first learns of the rendition of the judgment. The heirs of Lim Heh Chio, who are the main parties in interest, have been aware of the judgment for several years. The administrator, appointed at their instance, merely represents the heirs for the purpose of reopening the judgment. Allowing such a proceeding would lead to endless litigations. The Court found no legal basis for the administrator's claim that he could not intervene until appointed. The appointment of a stranger as administrator does not alter the situation or extend the period for seeking relief. The Court emphasized that the administrator's right to file the petition is derivative of the heirs' rights and subject to the same limitations. Therefore, the administrator stands in the same position as the heirs regarding their knowledge of the judgment and the timeliness of the petition. On the issue of when the sixty-day period should be counted: The Court ruled that the sixty-day period for presenting the petition must be counted from the date the party first learns of the rendition of the judgment. The argument that the period should be counted from the administrator's appointment was rejected. The Court stated that it has not been informed of any law supporting such a proposition. The appointment of an administrator, especially when done as a "subterfuge" after the judgment has become final and the heirs are aware of it, does not create a new period for filing a petition for relief. The purpose of Section 513 is to provide a remedy for parties who were deprived of their day in court due to mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, and not to allow parties who have knowledge of the judgment to circumvent the rules by appointing a new representative. The Court found that the heirs, and consequently the administrator representing them, had knowledge of the judgment for a considerable period, rendering the petition untimely.
Main Doctrine
An administrator appointed at the instance of the heirs cannot avail of a petition for relief from judgment under Section 513 of the Code of Civil Procedure if the heirs themselves have long been aware of the judgment and the period for filing such petition has already expired.