AgencyDPFebruary32014

Rtcrendersjudgmentinfavorofsmc it ruled that the

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: of P209,076.00, equivalent to the land's total assessed value,4 which was confirmed, ratified and approved in November, 1966 by the Commissioner of Public Highways and the Secretary of Public Works and Communications. On November 7, 1966, the Compromise Agreement subscribed by counsel for respondent estate and by then Solicitor General Antonio P. Barredo, now a member of this Court, was submitted to the lower Court and under date of November 8, 1966, respondent judge, as prayed for, rendered judgment approving the Compromise Agreement and ordering petitioners, as defendants therein, to pay respondent estate as plaintiff therein, the total sum of P209,076.00 for the expropriated lot. On October 10, 1968, respondent estate filed with the lower Court a motion for the issuance of a writ of execution, alleging that petitioners had failed to satisfy the judgment in its favor. It further filed on October 12, 1968, an ex­parte motion for the appointment of respondent Benjamin Garcia as special sheriff to serve the writ of execution. No opposition having been filed by the Solicitor General's office to the motion for execution at the hearing thereof on October 12, 1968, respondent judge, in an order dated October 14, 1968, granted both motions. On the same date, October 14, 1968, respondent Garcia, as special sheriff, forthwith served a Notice of Garnishment, together with the writ of execution dated October 14, 1968, issued by 71 respondent Manuela C. Florendo as Deputy Clerk of Court, on respondent Philippine National Bank, notifying said bank that levy was thereby made upon funds of petitioners Bureau of Public Highways and the Auditor General on deposit, with the bank to cover the judgment of P209,076.00 in favor of respondent estate, and requesting the bank to reply to the garnishment within five days. On October 16, 1968, three days before the expiration of the five­day deadline, respondent Benjamin V. Coruña in his capacity as Chief, Documentation Staff, of respondent bank's Legal Department, allegedly acting in excess of his authority and without the knowledge and consent of the Board of Directors and other ranking officials of respondent bank, replied to the notice of garnishment that in compliance therewith, the bank was holding the amount of P209,076.00 from the account of petitioner Bureau of Public Highways. Respondent bank alleged that when it was served with Notice to Deliver Money signed by respondent Garcia, as special sheriff, on...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online