SECOND DIVISION
[A.M. No. MTJ-00-1269. August 24,
2000]
DOMINGA D. QUILAL-LAN, complainant, vs. JUDGE ALICIA L.
DELOS SANTOS, Municipal Trial Court, Digos, Davao del Sur, respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
QUISUMBING, J.:
Before us is the
complaint filed by Dominga D. Quilal-lan against Judge Alicia L. delos Santos
of the Municipal Trial Court, Digos, Davao del Sur. According to complainant,
respondent failed to render judgment within the prescribed period in Civil Case
No. 2554-98, a case for forcible entry and, thus, covered by the Revised Rule
on Summary Procedure. Complainant’s daughter was one of the defendants in said
case.
In the forcible
entry case, respondent gave the parties 30 days from August 7, 1998 to submit
their position papers.[1] Complainant claims that defendants filed their
position paper on September 8, 1998.[2] By September 21, 1998, plaintiff still had not
submitted his position paper, prompting defendants to file a motion for
rendition of judgment.[3] However, until the time of the filing of the
complaint on October 21, 1998, respondent had not yet rendered a decision on
the case.[4]
In her comment,
received by the Office of the Court Administrator on May 17, 1999, respondent
pointed out that she was on sick leave beginning November 15, 1998 and was
hospitalized at the UST Hospital from said date to January 15, 1999. Hence, she
could not be expected to render a decision on the subject forcible entry case.
Respondent claimed her decision was due on December 7, 1998.[5]
Attached to
respondent’s comment was her approved application for sick leave, from November
16, 1998 to March 30, 1999,[6] and a medical certificate showing that she was
confined at the UST Hospital from November 11, 1998 to December 14, 1998.[7] Respondent prayed for the dismissal of the complaint
and called upon defendants’ counsel in the forcible entry case not to deceive
her clients into believing that the delay in the decision was intentional.
A case for forcible
entry is covered by the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure. Section 10 of said
rule provides:
"SEC. 10. Rendition
of judgment. -- Within thirty (30) days after the receipt of the last
affidavits and position papers, or the expiration of the period for filing the
same, the court shall render judgment.
x x
x"
Per order of
respondent judge dated August 7, 1998, the parties to the subject forcible
entry case had until September 6, 1998 to submit their position papers.
Defendants belatedly submitted their position paper on September 8, 1998 while
plaintiff failed to submit his position paper. Since the period to file the
position papers expired on September 6, 1998, respondent had until October 6,
1998 to render judgment, per Section 10 of the Revised Rule of Summary
Procedure, not until December 7, 1998 as respondent claimed. It is of no moment
that respondent was on sick leave starting November 16, 1998. This date is more
than a month after October 6, 1998. Respondent should have rendered judgment in
the forcible entry case before she went on leave.
Delay in the
disposition of cases covered by the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure defeats
the very purpose of said rule, which is the expeditious and inexpensive
determination of cases. Failure to decide such cases on time renders the
rationale for the rule meaningless and inutile.[8]
Respondent appears
to be remiss in her duties as judge when she failed to render judgment in the
case as mandated by the rules. Under Rule 3.05 of the Code of Judicial Conduct,
she is required to dispose of the court’s business promptly and to decide cases
within the required time frame. We have time and again reminded judges to
comply with the rules regarding the period to decide cases, in pursuance of the
Court’s oft-repeated policy of speedy disposition of quality justice for all.
The Office of the
Court Administrator recommends that respondent be reprimanded for her failure
to decide a case on time. However, we deem it appropriate to impose upon her a
fine of P1,000.00, in consonance with our ruling in In Re: Administrative Matter
No. MTJ-99-1181 (Formerly Administrative Matter OCA IPI No. 97-276-MTJ, Renato
M. Casia vs. Judge Gerardo E. Gestopa, Jr.), August 11, 1999.
WHEREFORE, respondent Judge Alicia L. delos Santos, Municipal
Trial Court, Digos, Davao del Sur, is hereby FINED in the amount of P1,000.00
for her failure to decide Civil Case No. 2554-98 on time, with a WARNING that a
repetition of the same or a similar offense will be dealt with more severely.
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo,
(Chairman), Mendoza, Buena, and De
Leon, Jr., JJ., concur.
[1] Rollo, p. 2.
[2] Id. at 5.
[3] Id. at 3.
[4] Id. at 1.
[5] Respondent’s Comment (denominated as Reply) to the
Complaint, p. 1.
[6] Application for Leave, p. 1.
[7] Medical certificate, p. 1.
[8] In Re: Administrative Matter No. MTJ-99-1181
(Formerly Administrative Matter OCA IPI No. 97-276-MTJ)(Renato M. Casia vs. Judge
Gerardo E. Gestopa, Jr.), August 11, 1999, p. 7.