AgencyDPFebruary32014

In other words whethertheagencyis general or special

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: sought the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction for the immediate reimbursement of the garnished sum of P209,076.00, constituting funds of petitioner Bureau on deposit with the Philippine National Bank as official depository of Philippine Government funds, to the said petitioner's account with the bank, so as to forestall the dissipation of said funds, which the government had allocated to its public highways and 72 infrastructure projects. The Court ordered on January 31, 1969 the issuance of the writ against the principal respondents solidarily, including respondent judge therein so that she would take forthwith all the necessary measures and processes to compel the immediate return of the said government funds to petitioner Bureau's account with respondent bank.5 In compliance with the writ, respondent bank restored the garnished sum of P209,076.00 to 6 petitioner Bureau's account with it. The primary responsibility for the reimbursement of said amount to petitioner Bureau's account with the respondent bank, however, rested solely on respondent estate, since it is the judgment creditor that received the amount upon the questioned execution. Strangely enough, as appears now from respondent bank's memorandum in lieu of oral argument,7 what respondent bank did, acting through respondent Coruña as its counsel, was not to ask respondent estate to reimburse it in turn in the same amount, but to file with the probate court with jurisdiction over respondent estate,8 a motion for the estate to deposit the said amount with it, purportedly in compliance with the writ. Respondent estate thereupon deposited with respondent bank as a savings account the sum of P125,446.00, on which the bank presumably would pay the usual interest, besides. As to the balance of P83,630.00, this sum had been in the interval paid as attorney's fees to Atty. Jesus B. Santos, counsel for the estate, by the administrator, allegedly without authority of the probate court.9 Accordingly, respondent estate has not reimbursed the respondent bank either as to this last amount, and the bank has complacently not taken any steps in the lower court to require such reimbursement. Hence, thi...
View Full Document

This document was uploaded on 03/11/2014.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online