Encarnacion v. Provincial Sheriff of Rizal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Ayala y Compañia filed ejectment cases (civil cases Nos. 1415 and 1416) against Gervasia Encarnacion and Urbano Navarro for failure to pay rent. Petitioners owned houses built on respondent's land, with occupation and rent stipulated in lease contracts. Judgments were rendered ordering petitioners to pay rent and vacate the land. These judgments became final as no appeal was filed. Procedural History: Writs of execution were issued, directing petitioners to remove their houses or face demolition. To prevent this, petitioners filed civil case No. 6494 in the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Rizal, seeking an injunction against Ayala y Compañia and the sheriff. A preliminary injunction was granted upon posting of a bond. After trial, the CFI dismissed the complaint, holding that Ayala y Compañia was entitled to execution of the final justice of the peace court judgments. Petitioners appealed this dismissal to the Supreme Court (docketed as G.R. No. 45302). The Petition: Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court to set aside the alias writs of execution issued by the justice of the peace court on July 25, 1936, in the original ejectment cases. A preliminary injunction was issued by the Supreme Court upon petitioners posting a P500 bond.
Issue(s)
Whether the respondent justice of the peace acted with abuse of discretion in issuing the alias writs of execution. Whether the remedy of certiorari is proper to prevent irreparable damage to the petitioners.
Ruling
The petition is granted. The alias executions issued by the respondent justice of the peace on July 25, 1936, are set aside, and the preliminary injunction issued in the case is cancelled, without costs.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the respondent justice of the peace acted with abuse of discretion in issuing the alias writs of execution: The Supreme Court held that the justice of the peace did abuse his discretion in issuing the alias writs of execution. This abuse was not due to a lack of prior notice to the petitioners, but rather because the appeal filed by the petitioners in civil case No. 6494 in the Court of First Instance was pending. The Court reasoned that if the alias executions were carried out while the appeal was still pending, the appeal would become a mere "delusion." Furthermore, such action would deprive the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction to render a final judgment and definitively resolve the rights and controversies between the parties. The Court emphasized that the purpose of the petition was to maintain the status quo and allow for a careful consideration and final determination of the rights of the parties involved in the pending appeal. On whether the remedy of certiorari is proper to prevent irreparable damage to the petitioners: The Supreme Court affirmed that the remedy of certiorari lies to prevent a wrong which, under the circumstances, would be irreparable. The Court found that failure to prevent the compliance with the alias execution would cause irreparable damage to the petitioners. This damage stemmed from the fact that their appeal, which was already pending, would be rendered meaningless. The Court clarified that its decision did not express an opinion on the merits of the pending appeal but was solely aimed at preserving the status quo to ensure that the rights of the parties could be properly adjudicated. The fact that the respondent justice of the peace was not a party to civil case No. 6494 in the Court of First Instance was deemed not an obstacle to granting the petition, as the core issue was the potential for irreparable harm to the petitioners.
Main Doctrine
A writ of certiorari may be granted to set aside alias writs of execution issued by a justice of the peace if their enforcement would render a pending appeal a mere delusion and deprive the appellate court of its jurisdiction to render a final judgment, thereby causing irreparable damage.