View full case

ANDY QUELNAN v. VHF PHILIPPINES

FACTS:

This case involves an ejectment suit filed by respondent VHF Philippines, Inc. against petitioner Andy Quelnan over a condominium unit in Legaspi Towers 300. The Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) rendered a decision in favor of the respondent, ordering the petitioner to vacate the premises and pay certain amounts to the respondent. The decision became final and executory when no appeal was taken by the petitioner.

A writ of execution and notices were served on the petitioner's wife, who acknowledged receipt. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for relief from judgment with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, claiming that he was never served with summons and was unaware of the proceedings. The RTC granted the petition, setting aside the MeTC decision based on the petitioner's claim of excusable negligence.

The respondent sought reconsideration but was denied. As a result, the respondent filed a petition for review with the Court of Appeals (CA), which reversed the RTC decision and reinstated the MeTC decision. The petitioner then filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was also denied by the CA.

The petitioner now seeks to nullify and set aside the CA decision and resolution. He argues that the MeTC never acquired jurisdiction over him, and the findings of fact of the MeTC are not supported by evidence on record. The main issues to be resolved are whether the petitioner's knowledge of the decision can be determined from his failure to claim the registered mail and whether the 60-day period for filing a petition for relief should be reckoned from the date of knowledge of the judgment.

ISSUES:

  1. When is a party deemed to have knowledge of an adverse decision sent through registered mail?

  2. Does the presumption of completeness of service of a registered mail apply in determining the 60-day period for filing a petition for relief from judgment?

RULING:

  1. A party is deemed to have knowledge of an adverse decision sent through registered mail on the date of its first attempted delivery, regardless of whether the party actually received the notice or claimed the mail.

  2. The presumption of completeness of service of a registered mail does not apply in determining the 60-day period for filing a petition for relief from judgment. The 60-day period must be reckoned from the date of knowledge of the judgment, not from the date of attempted delivery.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Relief from judgment under Rule 38 is a legal remedy to set aside a judgment based on fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable neglect.

  • A petition for relief from judgment must be filed within 60 days from knowledge of the judgment.

  • The presumption of completeness of service of a registered mail does not apply in determining the 60-day period for filing a petition for relief from judgment.