Whereas here, the only definite ultimate fact averred is "that on or about October 20, 1998, due to the urgent need of the plaintiffs for the said property the defendants were notified and given by the plaintiffs a period of thirty (30) days from said date within which to vacate the said property to enable the plaintiffs to occupy the same.
A complaint for "ejectment" which does not show [how] defendants' possession started or continued is defective (Devesa vs. Montecillo, 27 SCRA 822). (underscoring in the original; italics supplied)
The undersigned is the Presiding Judge of MTC-Pandi, Bulacan since 1992 and the Assisting Judge of MTCC-San Jose del Monte City since 1995 up to the present. In this station, I conduct trials every Tuesdays and Thursdays of the week. In this additional station, I do not have the luxury of having a chamber. I only share a room and a table with another office staff because of the very acute space problem. Here, party litigants wait for the call of their cases in the adjacent public market or in a nearby plaza.
In our very crowded office, records do get misplaced or misfiled with no conscious design, dishonest purpose or some moral obliquity to cause injury to a party litigant.
Your honor, please look with favor at the fact that the dual positions of being the Presiding Judge of MTC-Pandi and Assisting Judge of MTCC-San Jose del Monte with their concomitant workload, necessarily spreads my mental and physical resources too thinly which accounts for those occasional administrative infractions attributable to human frailties for which I am truly sorry.4 (underscoring supplied)
x x x x
. . . The mere fact that the respondent judge was serving as acting presiding judge in another sala does not constitute sufficient reason to exonerate him from liability for delay in rendering decisions and resolving motions. This is not to prescind from his situation as a judge handling two courts. It has been stressed in several decisions that if it becomes unavoidable for a judge to render a decision or resolve a matter beyond the mandatory period, he may seek additional time by simply filing a request for such time extension seasonably and supported by valid reasons. The respondent did not avail himself of this action.
Section 5, Canon 6 (Competence and Diligence) of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary directs judges to "perform all judicial duties, including the delivery of reserved decisions, efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness." The heavy load in the respondent's sala, though unfortunate, cannot exempt him from due observance of the provisions of the Code.6 (underscoring supplied)
admonished to be more circumspect in observing the reglementary period for disposing of motions and deciding cases; and was sternly warned that a repetition of the same or similar act shall be dealt with more severely, [relieved] of his assignment as Assisting Judge of the MTCC at San Jose del Monte City. (emphasis and underscoring supplied)
Forcible entry and unlawful detainer cases are summary proceedings designed to provide an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or the right to the possession of the property involved. It does not admit of a delay in the determination thereof. It is a "time procedure" designed to remedy the situation. Stated in another way, the avowed objective of actions for forcible entry and unlawful detainer, which have purposely been made summary in nature, is to provide a peaceful, speedy and expeditious means of preventing an alleged illegal possessor of property from unjustly continuing his possession for a long time, thereby ensuring the maintenance of peace and order in the community; otherwise, the party illegally deprived of possession might feel the despair of long waiting and decide as a measure of self-protection to take the law into his hands and seize the same by force and violence. And since the law discourages continued wrangling over possession of property for it involves perturbation of social order which must be restored as promptly as possible, technicalities or details of procedure which may cause unnecessary delays should accordingly and carefully be avoided.
In accordance with the above objective, the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure set forth the steps to expeditiously dispose of the cases covered by the rules, as in ejectment...10 (emphasis supplied)
Endnotes:
* Additional member per Special Order No. 838 dated May 17, 2010.
1 Rollo, pp. 1-10. It was verified only on December 28, 2007 and received by the Docket and Clearance Division of the Office of the Court Administrator on January 8, 2008.
2 Id. at 23-24.
3 Id. at 49-52.
4 Id. at 51-52.
5 Id. at 69-75.
6 Id. at 74.
7 Id. at 73.
8Vide Salandanan v. Mendez, G.R. No. 160280, March 13, 2009, 581 SCRA 182, 195.
9 G.R. No. 143331, October 5, 2007, 535 SCRA 28.
10 Id. at 43-44.
11 RESOLUTION OF THE COURT EN BANC DATED OCTOBER 15, 1991 PROVIDING FOR THE REVISED RULE ON SUMMARY PROCEDURE FOR METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS AND MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS.
12 Vide Saceda v. Judge Gestopa, Jr., 423 Phil. 420, 424 (2001).
13 The New Code of Judicial Conduct provides that in case of deficiency or absence of specific provisions in the Code, the Canons of Judicial Ethics and the Code of Judicial Conduct shall be applicable in a suppletory character.
14]Re: Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted in the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 2, Cagayan de Oro City, A.M. No. 02-8-207-MTCC, July 27, 2009, 594 SCRA 20, 33-34.