SECOND DIVISION
[A.M. No. P-01-1464. March 13, 2001]
SALVADOR O. BOOC, complainant, vs. MALAYO B. BANTUAS,
SHERIFF IV, RTC, BRANCH 3, ILIGAN CITY, respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
DE
LEON, JR., J.:
An affidavit-complaint
dated August 31, 1999 was filed before the Office of the Court Administrator
(OCA) by Salvador Booc charging Malayo B. Bantuas, Sheriff IV of the Regional
Trial Court (RTC), Branch 3, Iligan City with Gross Ignorance of the Law and
Grave Abuse of Authority relative to Civil Case No. 1718 entitled, “Felipe G.
Javier, Jr. vs. Rufino Booc.”
Complainant is the
President of five Star Marketing Corporation.
On August 22, 1994 herein respondent Sheriff Malayo B. Bantuas, pursuant
to a Writ of Execution issued in Civil Case No. 1718 filed a Notice of Levy
with the Register of Deeds, Iligan City over a parcel of land covered by TCT
No. T-19209 and owned by Five Star Marketing Corporation. Complainant alleged that respondent sheriff,
at the instance of plaintiff, former Judge Felipe Javier, proceeded to file the
Notice of Levy despite respondent sheriff’s knowledge that the property is
owned by the corporation which was not a party to the civil case.
On July 31, 1995, the
corporation through the complainant reiterated to respondent sheriff that it
was the owner of the property and Rufino Booc had no share or interest in the
corporation. Hence, the corporation
demanded that respondent sheriff cancel the notice of levy, otherwise the
corporation would take the appropriate legal steps to protect its interest.
Respondent sheriff,
however, did not heed the corporation’s demand inasmuch as on August 20, 1999
the corporation received a “Notice of Sale on Execution of Real Property,”
dated August 11, 1999, covering the subject property. Respondent sheriff scheduled the public auction on August 31, 1999. Consequently, the corporation, to protect
its rights and interests, was compelled to file an action for Quieting of Title
with the RTC, Branch 4 of Iligan City.
Respondent sheriff, in
his answer to the complaint filed against him before the OCA, said that he
filed a Notice of Levy with the Register of Deeds of Iligan City on the share,
rights, interest and participation of Rufino Booc in the parcel of land owned
by Five Star Marketing Corporation.
Respondent sheriff claimed that Rufino Booc is the owner of around 200
shares of stock in said corporation according to a document issued by the
Securities and Exchange Commission.
Respondent sheriff
stressed that the levy was made on the share, rights and/or interest and
participation which Rufino Booc, as president and stockholder, may have in the parcel
of land owned by Five Star Marketing Corporation. Claiming that he was only acting pursuant to his duties as
sheriff, respondent cited Section 15, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court which
states that
x x x The officer must enforce an execution of a money judgment
by levying on all the property, real and personal of every name and nature
whatsoever, and which may be disposed of for value of the judgment debtor not
exempt from execution.
Real property stocks, shares, debts, credits, and other personal
property, or any interest in either real or personal property, may be levied
upon in like manner and with like effect as under a writ of execution.
Respondent sheriff said
that while complainant Salvador Booc made a demand for the cancellation of levy
made, the former deemed it wise to have the judgment satisfied in accordance
with Section 39 of the Rules of Court.
Respondent sheriff added that the trial court where the case for
Quieting of Title filed by the corporation was pending ordered the auction sale
of the shares of stock of Rufino Booc.
The corporation allegedly never questioned said order of the RTC.
Finally, respondent
sheriff averred that the corporation is merely a dummy of Rufino Booc and his
brother Sheikding Booc. Respondnet
sheriff submitted as an exhibit an affidavit executed by Sheikding Booc wherein
the latter admitted that when Judge Felipe Javier won in the civil case against
Rufino Booc, the latter simulated a transfer of his shares of stock in Five
Star Marketing Corporation so that the property may not be levied upon.[1]
Complainant, in his reply
to respondent sheriff’s comment belied the latter’s allegation that the
corporation never questioned the auction sale.
Complainant averred that contrary to the respondent sheriff’s assertion,
the trial court in fact issued a restraining order which was withdrawn after
plaintiff’s counsel manifested that the respondent sheriff would only auction
Rufino Booc’s shares of stock in the corporation and not the subject property.
The OCA found respondent
sheriff liable for the charges filed against him, stating that respondent
sheriff acted in bad faith when he auctioned the subject property inasmuch as
Judge Mangotara had already warned him that the public auction should pertain
only to shares of stock owned by Rufino Booc in Five Star Marketing
Corporation. Respondent sheriff,
however, in violation of the order issued by Judge Mangotara and in disregard
of the manifestation filed by plaintiff’s counsel that the sale should involve
only the shares of stock, proceeded to auction the subject property. The OCA, thus, made the recommendation that:
1) The instant case be RE-DOCKETED as a regular administrative matter; and
2) Respondent Sheriff Malayo B. Bantuas be FINED in the amount of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) for conducting the auction sale in violation of the terms of the order issued by Acting Presiding Judge Mamindiara P. Mangotara with a STERN WARNING that a commission of the same or similar acts in the future shall be dealt with more severely.
A careful scrutiny of the
records shows that respondent sheriff, in filing a notice of levy on the
subject property as well as in the certificate of sale, did not fail to mention
that what was being levied upon and sold was whatever shares, rights, interests
and participation Rufino Booc, as president and stockholder in Five Star
Marketing Corporation may have on subject property. Respondent sheriff, however, overstepped his authority when he
disregarded the distinct and separate personality of the corporation from that
of Rufino Booc as stockholder of the corporation by levying on the property of
the corporation. Respondent sheriff
should not have made the levy based on mere conjecture that since Rufino Booc
is a stockholder and officer of the corporation, then he might have an interest
or share in the subject property.
It is settled that a
corporation is clothed with a personality separate and distinct from that of
its stockholders. It may not be held
liable for the personal indebtedness of its stockholders. In the case of Del Rosario vs. Bascar, Jr.,[2] we imposed the
fine of P5,000.00 on respondent sheriff Bascar for “allocating unto himself the
power of the court to ‘pierce the veil of corporate entity’ and improvidently
assuming that since complainant Esperanza del Rosario is the treasurer of
Miradel Development Corporation, they are one and the same.” In the said case
we reiterated the principle that the mere fact that one is a president of the
corporation does not render the property he owns or possesses the property of
the corporation since the president, as an individual, and the corporation are
separate entities.
Based on the foregoing,
respondent Sheriff Bantuas has clearly acted beyond his authority when he
levied the property of Five Star Marketing Corporation. The fact, however, that respondent sheriff,
in levying said property, had stated in the notice of levy as well as in the
certificate of sale that what was being levied upon and sold was whatever rights,
shares interest and/or participation Rufino Booc, as stockholder and president
in the corporation, may have on the subject property, shows that respondent
sheriff’s conduct was impelled partly by ignorance of Corporation Law and
partly by mere overzealousness to comply with his duties and not by bad faith
or blatant disregard of the trial court’s order. Hence, we deem that the penalty of a fine of Five Thousand Pesos
(P5,000.00) to be imposed on respondent sheriff would suffice.
WHEREFORE, respondent Malayo B. Bantuas, Sheriff IV of
the RTC of Iligan City , Branch 3, is hereby FINED in the sum of Five Thousand
Pesos (P5,000.00) with the STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or
similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.
SO ORDERED.
Bellosillo, (Chairman),
Mendoza, Quisumbing, and Buena, JJ., concur.