View full case

TAM WING TAK v. MAKASIAR

FACTS:

The case involves a petition for review on certiorari of the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 35, which dismissed the petitioner's special civil action for mandamus and sustained the Letter-Order of the respondent Chief State Prosecutor. The petitioner had filed a complaint against Vic Ang Siong for violation of the Bouncing Checks Law. The City Prosecutor dismissed the complaint, stating that the petitioner lacked the authority to file the case on behalf of Concord-World Properties, Inc. (Concord) and that Concord and Vic Ang Siong had already agreed to settle the issue. The petitioner's counsel received a copy of the resolution dismissing the complaint on June 27, 1994, and moved for reconsideration on July 7, 1994. The City Prosecutor denied the motion for reconsideration on October 21, 1994. The petitioner appealed the dismissal of the complaint to the Chief State Prosecutor, but the appeal was dismissed for being filed out of time. The petitioner then filed a petition for mandamus with the Regional Trial Court to compel the Chief State Prosecutor to file an information against Vic Ang Siong. The trial court denied the petition, and the petitioner filed the instant petition for review with the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Was there valid service of the City Prosecutor's resolution upon petitioner?

  2. Will mandamus lie to compel the City Prosecutor to file the necessary information in court?

RULING:

  1. Yes, there was valid service of the City Prosecutor's resolution upon petitioner. The resolution was served on the petitioner by registered mail and was delivered to the petitioner's given address. The service was complete and the period for filing a motion for reconsideration or appeal began to toll from the date of delivery. Since the petitioner filed his motion for reconsideration beyond the prescribed period, further appeal to the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor was already precluded.

  2. No, mandamus will not lie to compel the City Prosecutor to file the necessary information in court. The trial court correctly denied petitioner's petition for mandamus as it found that the petition lacked merit.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Service of orders, resolutions, processes, and other papers should be made on the party or his counsel, either in his office or residence, by a person in charge or a person of sufficient discretion to receive the same.

  • The period for filing a motion for reconsideration or appeal begins to toll from the date of delivery of the service of the order or resolution.

  • Mandamus does not lie when the petitioner's petition lacks merit.