Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[A.M. No. P-2254. July 17, 1981.]

FELICIDAD FELARCA-BERDIN, Complainant, v. PETRONILA AMBROSIO-GARCIA, Respondent.

Jose C. Sahagun for complainant.

Benjamin Santos for Respondent.

SYNOPSIS


Respondent, clerk-stenographer in the city court, was denounced for willful failure to pay just debts and frequent unauthorized absences or tardiness. Complainant claimed that respondent defaulted in paying her rentals for the room respondent and her husband were occupying since arrearages had piled up with respondent only making sporadic payments, until 1979 when complainant filed an ejectment suit against the spouses. Shortly before the hearing of this administrative complaint, respondent and her husband were able to pay their back rentals but the investigation revealed that respondent deliberately failed to pay said rentals. As to the second charge, the testimonies of complainant’s witnesses were vague and inconsistent.

The Supreme Court found respondent guilty of deliberately failing to pay back rentals and ordered her to pay a fine equivalent to her salary for fifteen days; but exculpated her from the charge of tardiness and frequent unauthorized absences, holding that the vague and inconsistent testimonies of complainant’s witnesses could not prevail over respondent’s time records which showed that she maintained regular office hours.


SYLLABUS


1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OF COURTS; ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT; FAILURE TO PAY JUST DEBT; FOUND DELIBERATE IN CASE AT BAR AND PENALIZED WITH FINE. — Where the investigation reveals that respondent lass deliberately failed to pay back rentals and such finding is supported by evidence, respondent will be held answerable for willful failure to pay just debt and will be ordered to pay a fine equivalent to her salary for fifteen days.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; TARDINESS OR IRREGULAR ATTENDANCE; VAGUE TESTIMONIES OF COMPLAINANT’S WITNESSES CANNOT PREVAIL OVER RESPONDENT’S TIME RECORDS. —The vague and inconsistent testimonies of complainant’s witnesses as to the charge of tardiness or irregular office attendance cannot prevail over respondent’s time records which show that she has maintained regular office hours


D E C I S I O N


AQUINO, J.:


Felicidad Felarca-Berdin charged Petronila Ambrosio-Garcia, a clerk-stenographer in Branch V of the city court of Quezon City, with willful failure to pay just debts and frequent unauthorized absences or tardiness.

Mrs. Garcia denied the charges. After Mrs. Berdin had filed a reply and Mrs. Garcia had submitted a rejoinder, the case was referred to the executive judge of the city court for investigation, report and recommendation.

Willful failure to pay just debts. — The evidence shows that sometime in May, 1975, Mrs. Berdin, 66, a retired government employee and her sister, Mariquita L. Felarca, leased to Mrs. Garcia and her husband a room on the ground floor of her house located at 16 Banahaw Street, Cubao, Quezon City for a monthly rental of one hundred pesos payable within the first five days of the month, with free light and water.

The Garcia spouses complied faithfully with their obligation for the first few months. Then, they defaulted and their arrearages piled up.

On December 21, 1975, Mrs. Berdin caused respondent’s husband, Reynaldo, to sign a document captioned "Reynaldo Garcia Rental Schedule of Payment" under which he agreed to pay on a staggered basis up to August 31, 1976 the back rentals amounting to P589 as of December, 1975 together with the rental for January, 1976. Respondent Mrs. Garcia also signed that agreement (Exh. A).

Because the Garcias only made sporadic payments, Mrs. Berdin reminded them of their obligation in her letter dated October 21, 1976. In May, 1979 when the Garcias’ obligations totalled P1,505.00, Mrs. Berdin’s lawyer sent them a pay-and-vacate demand letter dated May 31, 1979, giving them until the end of June, 1979 to settle their account and to leave the premises.

On June 4, 1979, the Garcias paid fifty pesos but did not vacate the room. As of that date, their back rentals amounted to P1,555.00 (Exh. Z). On August 14, 1979, Mrs. Berdin filed an ejectment suit against the Garcia spouses in the Quezon City city court (Civil Case No. 35986).

At the same time, she lodged with the executive judge of the city court the administrative complaint against Mrs. Garcia. (See sec. 36[b][22], Civil Service Decree, Presidential Decree No. 807.)

As a counter-move, the Garcias filed with the city court on August 28, 1979 a petition for consignation of rentals. They alleged that Mrs. Berdin had deliberately refused to accept their payments so that she would have a pretext to eject them.

Eventually, or as of August, 1980 and shortly before the hearing of this administrative case, the Garcias were able to pay the back rentals. The investigator found that Mrs. Garcia deliberately failed to pay the back rentals. That finding is supported by the evidence.

Tardiness. — As to the charge of tardiness or irregular office attendance, Mrs. Berdin attached to her complaint the affidavits of Monica Rance and Cristobella Engana who alleged that Mrs. Garcia invariably left her residence at nine o’clock in the morning and returned at about four in the afternoon, carrying with her a plastic bag containing fresh fish, meat and vegetables which she cooked in the morning.

The investigator found that the second charge was not proven. The vague and inconsistent testimonies of Mrs. Berdin’s witnesses cannot prevail over Mrs. Garcia’s time records which show that she maintained regular office hours (Exh. 8 to 16-C). She is hereby exculpated from that charge.

WHEREFORE, for willful failure to pay just debts, respondent Mrs. Garcia is ordered to pay a fine equivalent to her salary for fifteen days. A copy of this decision should be attached to her personal record.

SO ORDERED.

Barredo (Chairman), Concepcion Jr., Abad Santos and De Castro, JJ., concur.

Top of Page