Rodante Guyamin, et.al. v. Jacinto Flores, et.al., G.R. No. 202189, April 25, 2017, Del Castillo, J.
This Court has time and again reiterated the doctrine that the rules of procedure are mere tools aimed
at facilitating the attainment of justice, rather than its frustration. A strict and rigid application of the
rules must always be eschewed when it would subvert the primary objective of the rules, that is, to
enhance fair tria.ls and expedite justice. Technicalities should never be used to defeat the substantive
rights of the other party.
FACTS:
The respondents filed a complaint for recovery of possession against petitioners. They alleged that
they were the registered owners of a 984 sq.m. property in Gen. Trias, Cavite, which they allowed
Petitioners to occupy as their relatives. After demand to vacate, Petitioners however, refused to do
so and conciliation in the barangay only proved to be futile. Thus, compelling them to file an action.
Summons were served upon the Petitioners, however they refused to sign the receipt. Respondent
filed a motion to declare petitioners in default contending that despite service of summons they still
failed to appear. The RTC granted the same.
ISSUE:
Whether or not the RTC correctly declared Petitioners in default.
RULING:
YES. The court process server's Return of Summons dated September 26, 2006 exists, and must be
presumed regular. The mere fact that the RTC, and even the respondents, requested at different
stages in the proceedings that summons be served once more upon petitioners does not prove that
the service thereof made on September 25, 2006 was invalid; it only means that the court and
parties desire the service of summons anew which was clearly unnecessary. The claim that Lucinia
was then abroad is of no moment either; there is no evidence to support this self-serving claim.
The filing of petitioners' answer prior to respondents' motion to declare them in default, and the
latter's filing of a reply, do not erase the fact that petitioners' answer is late. Respondents' reply
filed thereafter is, like the belated answer a mere scrap of paper, as it proceeds from the said
answer.
DEAN’S CIRCLE 2019 – UST FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW, retrieved April 24, 2020, from https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/7dcde495/files/uploaded/Civil%20Procedure_MwNwIo5Rs6cBBO1gwlro.pdf
0 Comments