Zaragosa Vs Fidelino
Zaragosa Vs Fidelino
________________
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
* FIRST DIVISION.
444
NARVASA, J.:
_________________
445
'WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiff and against the
defendant, ordering defendant Maria Angela Fidelino and her surety, the Mabini
Insurance & Fidelity Co., Inc., to pay jointly and severally to the plaintiff the sum of
P19,417.46, representing the balance of the purchase price of the car sold, including
interests thereon, collection charges, notarial fees and sheriff s fees and expenses in
connection with the recovery of the vehicle sold, liquidated damages in the amount
of P6,471.84 equivalent to 33 1/3% of the balance outstanding; and to pay the costs
of this suit.'"
________________
446
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
It would seem at first blush that Section 20, Rule 57 above quoted is
not relevant. Its title and first sentence speak [1] of
________________
9 Mabini says that Zaragoza received notice of the decision 011 March 7,1968; the
30-day period of appeal was not interrupted by the motion to amend decision dated
March 20, 1968 and therefore the judgment became fmal and executory on April 7,
1968 and hence could no longer be amended on April 16, 1968 when the Order of
amendment was promulgated. (Pp. 96-97, Rec. on App.)
10 Emphasis supplied.
447
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
________________
448
________________
449
"SEC. 17. Wheri execution returned unsatisfied, recovery had upon bond.—
lf the execution be returned unsatisfied in whole or in part, the surety or
sureties on any counter-bond given pursuant to the provisions of this rule to
secure the payment of the judgment shall become charged on such counter-
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
bond, and bound to pay to the judgment creditor upon demand, the amount
due under the judgment, which amount may be recovered from such surety
or sureties after notice and summary hearing in the same action."
The record shows that the appellant surety company bound itself
"jointly and severally" with the defendant Fidelino "in the sum of
PESOS FORTY EIGHT THOUSAND ONLY (P48,000.00),
Philippine Cyrrency, which is double the value of the property stated
in the affidavit of the plaintiff, for the delivery thereof if such
delivery is adjudged, orfor thepayment ofsuch sum to him as16 may be
recovered against the defendant and the costs ofthe action."
This being so, the appellant surety's liability attached upon the
promulgation of the verdict against Fidelino. All that was necessary
to enforce the judgment against it was, as aforestated, an application
therefor with the Court, with due notice to the surety, and a proper
hearing, i.e., that it be formally notified that it was in truth being
made responsible for its coprincipal's adjudicated prestation (in this
case, the payment of the balance of the purchase price of the
automobile which could 17
no longer be found and therefore could not
be ordered returned), and an opportunity, at a hearing called for the
purpose, to show to the Court why it should not be adjudged so
responsible.18 A separate action was not necessary; it was in fact
proscribed. And again, the record shows suhstantial compli-
_________________
450
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
________________
entering of separate judgments against them; x x (and) while the prevailing party
may apply for an award of damages against the surety even after an award has been
already attained against the principal, as ruled in Visayan Surety and Insurance Co.
vs. Pascual, G.R, No. L-3694, still the application and notice against the surety must
be made before the judgment against the principal becomes flnal and executory, so
that all awards for damages may be included in the final judgment." SEE, also, Asian
Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. v. Nolasco, 79 SCRA 472; Cruz v. Manila Surety &
Fidelity Co., Inc., 92 Phil. 699; Japco v. City of Manila, 48 Phil. 851; 855; cf. Pajarito
v. Seneris, 87 SCRA 275.
19 Pp. 69-73, Rec. on App.
20 74, Rec. on App.
451
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 8/10
10/21/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 163
_________________
21 Sec. 23, Rule 14, Rules of Court; C.J.S., 122,123; SEE Feria, Civil Procedure,
1969 ed., pp. 19-20, and Moran, op. cit., Vol. 1, p. 55.
22 G.R. Nos. L-15836 and 16220, Sept. 29, 1962, 6 SCRA 98, citing Visayan
Surety & Insurance Corp. v. Pascual, et al., 85 Phil. 779 (referring to cases of
wrongfully issued writs of preliminary injunction, receivership, and seizure of
personal property), and Material Distributors (Phil.) Inc. v. Miles Timber and
Transport Corp., et al., 55 O.G. 1025,103 PhiL 162, supra (relating to receivership)
452
Decision affirmed.
——oOo——
_________________
453
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001669631edbe562ae4d5003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/10