Sie sind auf Seite 1von 3

AGO v.

CA

Petitioner: Pastro D. Ago


Respondent: The Hon. Court of Appeals,
Hon. Montano A. Ortiz, The Provinicial
Sheriff of Surigao and Grace Park
Engineering, Inc.
Case No.: G.R. No. L-17898
Promulgation: 31 October 31, 1962
Ponente: Labrador, J.

FACTS
1. Ago purchased sawmill machineries and equipment from
Grace Park Engineering Inc. (GPEI) A chattel mortgage was
executed by the parties in securing payment for the balance of
P32,000.00.

2. Ago assigned said machineries and equipment to Golden


Pacific Sawmill (GPS) as payment fro his subscription to the
shares of stock of said corporation. Said machineries and
equipment were installed in the building of GPS and used for
sawing of logs.

3. Ago defaulted in his payment, hence GPEI instituted


extrajudicial foreclosure proceedings of the mortgage.

4. Ago then instituted Special Civil Case No. 53 which resulted


to the arrival of the parties to the execution of a Compromise
Agreement. Ago, however, continued to default in his payments
and so GPEI filed a Motion for Execution which was granted by
the court.

5. The Provincial Sheriff (Sheriff) proceeded with the levy and


ordered the sale of the machineries and equipment. Ago filed a
Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with Preliminary
Injunction with the Court of Appeals (CA). His contentions
being:
(a) he and his counsel did not receive any notice as regards
the Decision of the lower court based on the Compromise
Agreement
(b) the Sheriff did not comply with the the notice of sale in
a newspaper of general circulation as required by the Rules
of Court
The CA issued a Writ of Injunction.
6. The Sheriff, however, had already sold the machineries and
equipment (they were sold to GPEI, it being the only bidder). The
CA then ordered the Sheriff to suspend the issuance of the
Certificate of Sale. After hearing the case, however, the CA
issued a decision which did not benefit Ago.

7. Ago proceeded with another Petition for Certiorari to review


the decision of the CA.

ISSUE
Whether or not the proceeding conducted by the Sheriff in
selling the machineries and equipment is valid and compliant
with the Rules.

RULING
No.

The installment of the machineries and equipment at the


building of GPS, and there being used in connection with the
industry, it has become necessary and permanent parts of GPS,
thus rendered as real properties.

As required by the Rules, in case of real property, the following


are required:
(a) posting of a notice describing the property for 20 days
in three public places in the municipality or city where the
property is situated and where it is to be sold
(b) if the property exceeds four hundred pesos, a copy of
the notice must be published once a week in a newspaper of
general circulation.

Considering that the machineries and equipment are valued at


more than P15,000.00, the publication of notice is required. And
the Sheriff, not having met said requirement, the sale must be
declared null and void.

[not related to Property]

ISSUE
Whether or not the rendition of the judgment in open court was
sufficient notice to Ago.

RULING
No.
Under the Rules, all judgments determining the merits of cases
shall be:
(a) in writing, personally and directly prepared by the
judge
(b) signed by him, stating clearly and distinctly the facts
and the law on which it is based
(c) and filed with the clerk of court

Mere pronouncement of the judgment in open court does not


constitute a rendition of the judgment. It is the filing of the
signed decision with the clerk of court that constitutes rendition.

Further, the Rules expressly require that final order or


judgments be served personally or by registered mail.