4/22/2017 A.M.No.

2756

TodayisSaturday,April22,2017

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila

ENBANC

A.M.No.2756June5,1986

PRUDENTIALBANK,complainant,
vs.
JUDGEJOSEP.CASTROandATTY.BENJAMINM.GRECIA,respondents.

PERCURIAM:

PrudentialBank(ComplainantBank)institutedthisadministrativecaseonApril11,1985,prayingthisCourtto
investigateRespondentJudgeJoseP.Castro,presidingoverRegionalTrialCourt,NationalCapitalJudicial
Region,BranchLXXXV,QuezonCity,(RespondentJudge),andAtty.BenjaminM.Grecia(RespondentGrecia),in
connectionwiththeiractuationsinacivilcase(theRTCCASE),triedanddecidedbyRespondentJudgeand
whereplaintiffwasrepresentedbyRespondentGrecia.

TheRTCCASEwasentitled"MacroTextileMillsCorporation,Plaintiff,vs.PrudentialBank&TrustCo.,AkaThe
PrudentialBankandBenjaminBaensdelRosario,NotaryPublicforQuezonCity,Defendants".PlaintiffintheRTC
CaseshallhereinafterbereferredtosimplyasMACRO.Itwastheregisteredownerofa19,493sq.m.lotin
QuezonCity,coveredbyTCTNo.261842(the"MACROPROPERTY"),allegedtohaveavalueofaboutP20
million.

WhathasbeenprayedforbyComplainantBankistheexercisebythisCourtofitspowertodisciplineRespondent
Judge,andtheinitiationofproceedingsforthedisbarmentorsuspensionofRespondentGrecia.

BasedondocumentssubmittedtothisCourt,therelevantfactsuponwhichthisResolutionisbasedmaybe
statedasfollows:

1.ThePresidentandGeneralManagerofMACROisnamedGoCunUy.Heisalsoapartnerof,orasignatory
for,apartnershipnamedGalaxyTricotManufacturingCo.(GALAXY,forshort).

2.AsofJanuary24,1983,MACROandGALAXY,together,wereindebtedtoComplainantBankintheprincipal
sumofP9,510,000.00.

3.OnthesaiddateofJanuary24,1983,MACRO,throughGoCunUy,executedamortgageovertheMACRO
PROPERTY("notarized"onJanuary26,1983)infavorofComplainantBanktoguaranteethethen,aswellas
future,obligationsofMACROand/orGALAXYinfavorofthemortgagee.

4.Morethanayearafter,oronApril11,1984,ComplainantBanksentaletterofdemandtoMACRO/GALAXY
demandingpaymentoftheirpendingobligationsinthetotalsumofPl1,629,503.92,exclusiveofinterest.

5.OnJuly12,1984,BenjaminBaensdelRosario,asaNotaryPublicforQuezonCity,issueda"NoticeofSaleBy
Notary",scheduledforAugust6,1984,fortheextrajudicialforeclosuresaleoftheMACROPROPERTY.

6.OnAugust2,1984,MACROfiledtheComplaintintheRTCCASEthroughAtty.MarioE.Valderama,alleging
principallythatGoCunUyhadnoauthoritytomortgagetheMACROPROPERTYandthathisexecutionofthe
mortgagewasduetofraudulentmanipulationsofComplainantBank.TheComplaintfurtherstatedthatMACRO
wasentitled"toactualdamagesamountingtoatleastP50,000,000.00aswellastocompensatorydamages."
Preliminaryattachmentwasprayedforon"somuchofthepropertiesofdefendantBankanddefendantNotaryas
maybesufficienttosatisfyanyjudgmentthatmayberenderedagainstthem."

7.Fourdaysthereafter,oronAugust6,1984,theComplaintwasamendedoverthesignatureofRespondent
Grecia.TheamendmentsareofnosubstantialrelevancetothisResolution.Thesameprayerforpreliminary
attachmentwasreiterated.
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1986/jun1986/am_2756_1986.html 1/4
4/22/2017 A.M.No.2756

8.OnthesamedateofAugust6,1984,RespondentJudge,statingthatthesalehadnottakenplaceonthatdate,
issuedanOrdertemporarilyrestrainingtheRegisterofDeedsofQuezonCityfromregisteringanyDeedofSale
oftheMACROPROPERTY

9.RespondentJudgethenresolvedtheRTCCASEthroughasummaryjudgmentrenderedonNovember16,
1984.IntheDecision,themortgageoftheMACROPROPERTYwasdeclarednullandvoid,andComplainant
BankandNotaryPublicDelRosariowereorderedtopayMACROmorethanP33millionindamagesplus20%
attorney'sfees.

10.Further,paragraph2ofthedispositivepartoftheDecisionprovidedasfollows:

2.TheRegisterofDeedsofQuezonCitytocancelimmediatelytheregistrationandannotationofthe
DeedofRealEstateMortgagedatedJanuary26,1983,aswellasitsforeclosure,noticeofsaleand
certificateofsaleontheOriginalTransferCertificateofTitleNo.261842

Theforegoingparagraph2isofprimaryrelevancetothisResolution.Whatwillbenotedthereinisthatthe
owner'sduplicateofTCTNo.261842,stillinthepossessionofComplainantBank,wasnotdeclaredcancelled.
Thecontinuedexistenceofthatowner'sduplicatecouldpreventtheregistrationofasaleoftheMACRO
PROPERTYwithoutitbeingsurrenderedtotheRegisterofDeedsasthelawrequirestheproductionofthe
owner'sduplicatecertificatewheneveranyvoluntaryinstrumentispresentedforregistration(Sec.53,P.D.No.
1529,thePropertyRegistrationDecree).

11.OnDecember7,1984,ComplainantBankfiledaMotionforReconsiderationofthesummaryjudgment.

12.WithoutrulingonComplainantBank'sMotionforReconsideration,RespondentJudge,inanOrderdated
January7,1985,amendedparagraph2ofhisDecision,bydirectingtheRegisterofDeedsofQuezonCity

...tocancelimmediatelytheregistrationoftheDeedofrealestatemortgagedatedJanuary24,1983
onthebackofTCTNo.261842pursuanttotheaforesaiddecision,andtoissueinfavorofthe
plaintiffanotherowner'scopyofsaidtransfercertificateoftitleaftersaidcancellation,inlieuofthe
copyinthepossessionofthedefendantbankwhichisherebydeemedcancelled.

Theamendmentofparagraph2orderedthecancellationoftheowner'sduplicateofTCTNo.261842,inthe
possessionofComplainantBank,andtheissuanceofanewowner'sduplicateofsaidTCTtoMACRO.Thus,
MACROwasplacedinapositiontodisposeoftheMACROPROPERTY.

13.(a)Sevendaysthereafter,oronJanuary14,1985,MACROsoldtheMACROPROPERTYtoFalconi
MarketingandManufacturing,Inc.(FALCONIforshort)forP6million.

(b)OnJanuary15,1985,TCTNo.261842wascancelledandTCTNo.326740wasissuedinthenameof
FALCONI.

14.OnFebruary7,1985,RespondentJudgedeniedComplainantBank'sMotionforReconsideration"notonlyfor
beingproformabutalsoforlackofmerit."UponreceiptofthecorrespondingOrderonFebruary13,1985,
ComplainantBankfiledanoticeofappealtotheIntermediateAppellateCourt.

15.ConsequenttothedenialoftheMotionforReconsiderationfiledbyComplainantBank,RespondentJudge,in
hisOrderofFebruary13,1985,consideredhisDecisionintheRTCCASEtobefinalandorderedtheissuanceof
aWritofExecution,whichalsoconstitutedadenialofComplainantBank'sappeal.

16.(a)OnFebruary18,1985,ComplainantBankcametothisCourtonMandamus/Certiorari(G.R.No.69907),
askingthatRespondentJudgebeorderedtoallowitsappealfromtheDecisionrenderedintheRTCCASEtothe
IntermediateAppellateCourtandtoannultheOrderandWritofExecutionhehadpreviouslyissued.

(b)probablybecauseoftheOrderofthisCourtrestrainingexecutionoftheDecisionintheRTCCASE,
RespondentJudge,onMarch13,1985,gavecoursetotheappealofComplainantBanktotheIntermediate
AppellateCourt.

17.(a)OnApril1,1985,ComplainantBankcausedaNoticeofLisPendenstobeannotatedonFALCONI'stitle.

(b)InG.R.No.69907,thisCourtonMay31,1985,setasidetheResolutionofJanuary7,1985ofRespondent
Judge.

(c)OnJune26,1985,theActingRegisterofDeedsofQuezonCitydeniedtherequestofComplainantBank,
invokingthisCourt'sresolutioninG.R.No.69907,forthecancellationofTCTNo.326740inthenameof
FALCONI.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1986/jun1986/am_2756_1986.html 2/4
4/22/2017 A.M.No.2756

(d)SometimeinJune,1985,FALCONIinstitutedaComplaintagainstComplainantBankandtheRegisterof
DeedsofQuezonCityforthecancellationoftheNoticeofLisPendensonitsTCTNo.326740,whichcaseis
pendingbeforetheRegionalTrialCourtofQuezonCity,BranchLXXXVI.

(e)OnSeptember23,1985,thisCourtinG.R.No.69907,orderedtheRegisterofDeeds(i)tocancelthenew
owner'sDUPLICATEOFTCTNo.261842(ii)torestoretheoldTCTNo.261842,withtheannotatedmortgage
lieninfavorofComplainantBankand(iii)tocancelTCTNo.326740inthenameofFALCONI.

NothinginthisResolutionshouldbeconstruedasadeterminationofafactualissueinthecontroversybetween
ComplainantBankandMACROintheRTCCASE,whichisnowpendingbeforetheIntermediateAppellateCourt.
ThisResolutiondealsonlywiththestepstakenbyRespondentJudgeinregardstotheRTCCASEwhenhewas
stillactingonit.Consideredinthelightofthefactsrelatedabove,wefindhehadcommittedseriousandgrave
misfeasanceinconnectionwithhisactuationsinthesaidRTCCASEinthat:

(a)InbothoriginalandamendedComplaintsintheRTCCASE,itwasapparentthatMACROwassuingforan
amountofatleastP50million.OntheverydateofAugust6,1984,whentheAmendedComplaintwasfiled,which
wasonlyfourdaysaftertheoriginalComplaintwasinstituted,RespondentJudgewasalreadyaware,perhis
Orderofattachment,thatMACRO"initsverifiedcomplaintandaffidavit",wasaskingdefendants"topaythesum
ofP50,000,000.00asactualandcompensatorydamageswhichplaintiffseekstorecoverfromdefendantinthis
case."

IntheoriginalandamendedComplaints,theprayersdidnotaskfordamagesspecificallyinthesumofmorethan
P50millionclearlyinordertoavoidpaymentoffilingfeesofmorethanP100,000.00.Thefilingfeeactuallypaid
wasonlyP210.00.

Ordinarily,aTrialJudgemaybeexcusedfromimmediatelynotingamistakemadebytheClerkofCourtin
assessingfilingfees.However,consideringRespondentJudge'srealizationofthemistake,onAugust6,1984,the
dateheissuedhisOrderforpreliminaryattachment,andhisactuationsthereafterintheRTCCASE,hisfailureto
requirepaymentofthecorrectamountoffilingfeesindicatedhispartialitytowards,nottosayconfabulationwith,
MACROand/oritslawyers.

(b)Thesummaryjudgmentwasillconceived.Foronething,theAmendedComplainthadchargedComplainant
Bankwithfraudanddeceit.Underthelaw,goodfaithistobepresumed,andthefraudanddeceitimputedto
ComplainantBankcannotbeotherthanaquestionoffact,whichshouldhavebeenresolvedafterduereception
ofevidenceproandcontra.TherewasnothingintheAnswer,andinitspleadingsinconnectionwithMACRO's
Motionforsummaryjudgment,whichcouldindubitablybedeemedanadmission,orproof,ofComplainantBank's
allegedfraudanddeceit.RespondentJudge'sstatementstothecontraryarebereftofveracity.

WorseerrorshavebeencommittedbyTrialJudgesbut,intheRTCCASE,theerroneouspromulgationofthe
summaryjudgmentindicates,inthelightoftheentirescenario,thattheerrorwasdeliberateinordertofavor
plaintiff,orthatitwasinactualconfabulationwithplaintiffanditslawyers.

(c)Theissuanceofthesummaryjudgmentwasbadenough.Thegrantthereinofdamagesintheamountof
morethanP33million,plus20%attorney'sfees,whenthepropertyinvolvedinthelitigationwasallegedinthe
amendedcomplaint(Annex"F")as.P20million(soldtoFALCONIforP6million)immediatelyraisesthethought
thatRespondentJudgehadreallytakenastandofpartialityinfavorofMACROanditslawyers.

(d)TheOrderofJanuary7,1985ofRespondentJudgealsoshowshispartialityto,orhisconfabulationwith
MACROandthelatter'slawyers.

ThesummaryjudgmentwasrenderedonNovember16,1984,andnoticethereofwasservedonComplainant
BankonNovember26,1984.ThelatterfiledaMotionforReconsiderationonDecember6,1984.If,as
RespondentJudgehasruled,theMotionforReconsiderationwasproformsthesummaryjudgmentbecamefinal
onDecember11,1984.RespondentJudge,therefore,wouldnolongerhaveauthoritytoamendhisDecisionon
January7.1985.WhentheMotionforReconsiderationwasdeniedonFebruary7,1985,RespondentJudge
shouldalsohavesetasidehisOrderofJanuary7,1985amendingthesummaryjudgment.Itcannowbecome
clearthatdefermentofactiononComplainantBank'sMotionforReconsiderationwaspreciselyforthepurposeof
allowingamendmentoftheDecisiononJanuary7,1985.

TheOrderofJanuary7,1985wassetasideinG.R.No.69907.ItisnowforustostatehereinthatRespondent
Judge,inissuingsuchOrder,clearlyintendedtofavorMACRObyallowingittosell,asitdidsell,theMACRO
propertytoFALCONIonJanuary14,1985.

(e)RespondentJudge,inhisOrderofMarch13,1985,gavecoursetotheappealofComplainantBankalthough
hehadalreadyruledthatthelatterhadlosttherightofappeal.ThatOrderofMarch13,1985wasissuedafter
ComplainantBankhadinstitutedG.R.No.69907onFebruary19,1985,askingthatRespondentJudgebe
orderedtoallowitsappealfromthesummaryjudgment.TheOrderofMarch13,1985wasclearlyintendedto

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1986/jun1986/am_2756_1986.html 3/4
4/22/2017 A.M.No.2756

renderG.R.No.69907mootandacademic.SaidOrderwasdisrespectfulofthisCourt.Ifatall,Respondent
JudgeshouldhavecometothisCourtinsaidG.R.No.69907,toaskforleavetoallowtheappealofComplainant
Bankwithadmissionthathehadrealizedthathispreviousdenialoftheappealwaserroneous.Anditmaybe
recalledthat,inDeLeonvs.Castro,104SCRA241(1981),thisCourthadoccasiontostatethatRespondent's
Judge's"submissionoffalsecertificatesofserviceunderSection5oftheJudiciaryLawisnotexcusable."

WHEREFORE,theCourtRESOLVES:

1.RespondentJudgeisherebyordereddismissedfromtheservice,withforfeitureofallretirementbenefitsand
payandwithprejudicetoreinstatementinanybranchofthegovernmentoranyofitsagenciesor
instrumentalities.Thisdecisionisimmediatelyexecutory.

2.TheComplaintfordisbarmentandsuspensionofrespondentAtty.BenjaminM.Greciaisherebyreferredtothe
SolicitorGeneralforinvestigation,reportandrecommendation.Lettherelevantpleadingsinthiscaseinregards
toRespondentGRECIA,andrelevantpleadingsaswellastheDecisioninG.R.No.69907befurnishedthe
SolicitorGeneralforthepurpose.

SOORDERED.

Teehankee,C.J.,AbadSantos,Feria,Yap,Fernan,NarvasaMelencioHerrera,Alampay,Gutierrez,Jr.,Cruzand
Paras,JJ.,concur.

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1986/jun1986/am_2756_1986.html 4/4