7. Bonifacio vs. Dizon

THIRD DIVISION [G.R. No. 79416, September 05, 1989] ROSAINA !ONI"A#IO, S$RVIVING %I"&' AND #HIDR&N GA!RI&, (ON#IANO, TI!$R#IO, !&ATRI), G&N&ROSA, SIV&RIA, &ONARDO, "&O*&NA, &N#ARNA#ION AND &ONIA, A S$RNA*&D !ONI"A#IO, (&TITION&RS, VS. HON. NATIVIDAD G. DI)ON, (R&SIDING +$DG& O" TH& R&GIONA TRIA #O$RT O" *AOOS, !RAN#H ,III, *AOOS, !$A#AN AND (ASTORA SAN *IG$&, R&S(OND&NTS. D & # I S I O N "&RNAN, #.+.-The issue raised in the instant petition for certiorari certified to us by the Court of Appeals in itsresolution[1]datedNovember 28, 198inCA!"#$# %&No# 1''((asinvolvin)apure *uestion of la+ is phrased by petitioners, thus,-./0T/0$ 1$ N1T, T/0 2A31$A450 678"90NT 14TA:N08 4; T/0 80C080NT :% :N/0$:T08 4; T/0 C19&75%1$; /0:$%, T/0$04; 30%T:N" T1 T/0 5ATT0$, A55 T/0 $:"/T% C1N20$$08 4; T/0 678"90NT T1 ud)ment adverted to by petitioners traces its ori)in to the complaint filed on 6uly 1, 198 by 1limpio 4onifacio before the then Court of A)rarian $elations, 2ifth $e)ional8istrict, 4ranch :!A of 4ali+a), 4ulacan, see?in) the e>ectment of private respondent &astora %an 9i)uel from4onifacio@s t+o!hectare a)ricultural land situated at &atubi), 9arilao,4ulacan and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No# T!2A298# The )round relied upon therefor +as personal cultivation under %ection ( ud)ment +ithrespect toher counterclaimbyorderin)1limpio4onifaciotopayher the amount of &1,(A#''#The >ud)ment +as affirmed in all other respects#[D]%till dissatisfied, private respondent &astora %an 9i)uel sou)ht relief from this Court# 8urin) the pendency of her petition, on Au)ust A, 198(, 1limpio 4onifacio died#As no notice of such death +as )iven to the Court, no order for the substitution of his heirs +as made#1n 6uly (1, 198D, the Court 0n 4anc resolved to deny private respondent@s petition for lac? of merit and to affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals#[]%ubse*uently, petitioners $osalina 4onifacio, as survivin) +ife, and "abriel, &onciano,Tiburcio, 4eatriF, "enerosa, %ilveria, 5eonardo, 2elomena, 0ncarnacion and 5eonila allsurnamed 4onifacio, as children and heirs of 1limpio 4onifacio, moved for the eGecution of thedecisioninCA$CaseNo# 21'!4C8beforetherespondent $e)ionalTrial Court of 4ulacan#A +rit of eGecution +as issued on 2ebruary 2', 198 and on 9arch , 198, the 8eputy%heriff submittedhis$eport ect matter of the action to $osalina 4onifacio as survivin) +ife of 1limpio 4onifacio#Thereafter,private respondent&astora %an 9i)uelmoved to*uash the +ritofeGecution# This +as opposed by petitioners +ho in turn sou)ht the issuance of a +rit of demolition and anorder declarin)&astora%an9i)uel incontempt of court for alle)edlyre!enterin)the sub>ect land#After hearin), respondent 6ud)e Natividad "# 8iFon issued a resolution on 6uly 1D, 198, the dispositive portion of +hich reads,-./0$021$0, the implementation of the +rit of eGecution of the 8ecision dated %eptember 18, 19A' made by the %heriff of this Court, per directive contained in our 1rder of 2ebruary 18, 198, isherebydeclarednull andvoidE the-9otionfor8emolition-filedbyplaintiff is hereby deniedE and, the -&etition for Contempt- li?e+ise denied#-%1 1$80$08#-[A]&etitioners assail this resolution in the petition for certiorari filed before the Court of Appeals, +hich as stated earlier, +as certified to us pursuant to %ection 9 ectment case but an a)rarian case for the e>ectment of an a)riculturallessee# %he theoriFes that the ri)ht bein) asserted in the action is personalto 1limpio4onifacio, +hichnecessarilydied+ithhim# %hefurther contendsthat thenon!substitution of 1limpio 4onifacio by his heirs rendered the proceedin)s ta?en after his death null and void# %he also points to certain supervenin) events +hich alle)edly prohibit eGecution of the >ud)ment in CA$ Case No# 21'!4 C8, to +it,the amendment of %ection ( ud)ment in CA$ Case No# 21'!4 C8#$ules of procedure ma?e it the duty of the attorney to inform the court promptly of his client@s death, incapacity or incompetency durin) the pendency of the action and to )ive the name and residence of his eGecutor, administrator, )uardian or other le)al representative#[9] :n case of a party@s death, the court, if the action survives, shallthen order upon proper notice the le)al representatives of the deceased to appear and to be substituted for the deceased +ithin a period of (' days or +ithin such time as may be )ranted#[1']:nthecaseat bar, 1limpio4onifacio@sdeathdurin)thependencyofprivaterespondent@s petition +as not communicated to the Court#As ruled by this Court in the case of 2lorendo, 6r# vs# Coloma, supra, involvin) substantially the same facts and issue,-G G G The petitioners challen)e the proceedin) in the Court of Appeals after the death of the plaintiff!appellantAdela%alindon# Theyareof theopinionthat sincethere+asnole)al representative substituted for %alindon after her death, the appellate court lost its >urisdiction over the case and conse*uently, the proceedin)s in the said court are nulland void#This ar)ument is +ithout merit#-There is no dispute that an e>ectment case survives the death of a party#The supervenin) deathof plaintiff!appellant %alindon did not eGtin)uish her civil personality ud)e acted +ith )rave abuse of discretion in havin) done so#The +rit prayed for should issue#%H&R&"OR&, thepetitionis"$ANT08# Theassailedresolutiondated6uly1D, 198is hereby set aside#The immediate eGecution of the decision in CA$ Case No# 21'!4 C8 is ordered#This decision is immediately eGecutory#No pronouncement as to costs#SO ORD&R&D.Gutierrez, Jr., Bidin, and Cortes, JJ., concur#Feliciano, J., on leave#