Section 20. Preliminary mandatory injunction in case of appeal.

Upon motion of
the plaintiff, within ten (10) days from the perfection of the appeal to the Regional
Trial Court, the latter may issue a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to
restore the plaintiff in possession if the court is satisfied that the defendant's appeal
is frivolous or dilatory or that the appeal of the plaintiff is prima facie meritorious.
(9a)
Preliminary Injunction when case is on appeal to the RTC
(1) If the judgment of the MTC is appealed, the Regional Trial Court may issue a writ of
preliminary mandatory injunction to restore the plaintiff in his possession, upon his
motion which shall be filed within ten (10) days from the perfection of appeal.
(2) The grant of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction is predicated upon a finding that
the (a) defendants appeal is frivolous or dilatory, or (b) plaintiffs appeal is prima facie
meritorious.1

Case Example of a Plaintiffs Appeal found prima facie meritorious

Dayao vs Shell Company of the Phils. Ltd
(G.R. No. L-32475, April 30, 1980)

Facts: The CFI of Rizal issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction allowing the turn-over of
possession of a sub-leased property back to Shell from Dayao as a result of an ejectment case filed by
the former. It is undisputed that Dayao failed and refused to vacate the property after proper notice.
He also allegedly violated the terms and agreements of the sub-lease agreement as mentioned by
Shell in its amended complaint.

Issue: Whether the CFI was correct in issuing the writ of preliminary injunction.

1Riano, Civil Procedure Vol. II, p. 465

Ruling: The original complaint showed that Shell's cause of action was predicated on Dayao's failure
to vacate the premises after the lapse of the ninety day notice of termination. In the amended
complaint, Shell added Dayao's failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the Sublease and
Dealer Agreement. The decision discloses that even during the trial, Shell had introduced evidence
substantiating Dayaos alleged violation of the terms of their agreement. Dayao objected to its
presentation but nonetheless introduced proof in contra.

Under the foregoing circumstances, it cannot be successfully argued that respondent Judge gravely
abused his discretion when he admitted the Amended Complaint during the pendency of the appeal.
Under Sec 20 Rule 70, the Court has authority to issue a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction
where a lessor's appeal is prima facie meritorious.

Section 21. Immediate execution on appeal to Court of Appeals or Supreme Court.

The judgment of the Regional Trial Court against the defendant shall be
immediately executory, without prejudice to a further appeal that may be taken
therefrom. (10a)
Decision of the RTC on appeal is immediately executory
Once the RTC decides on appeal, such decision, if against the defendant, is also immediately
executory, without prejudice to an appeal. 2 The appeal shall be filed before the Court of Appeals
through a Petition for Review under Rule 42.

The decision of the RTC on appeal is immediately executory and can no longer be stayed. Hence, the
remedy would now be to ask for the issuance of writ of preliminary injunction before the Court of
Appeals.

2Id.