G.R. No. 39902 , 39903. November 29, 1933.
DOMINADOR RAYMUNDO, petitioner-appellant, vs. LUNETA MOTOR CO., ET AL., respondents-appellees.

FACTS

Nicanor de Guzman, operating as Guzco Transit, purchased trucks from Luneta Motor Co., executing promissory notes secured by a chattel mortgage. Upon default, Luneta Motor Co. sued and obtained a writ of attachment against Guzco Transit’s properties, including its certificates of public convenience for certain bus lines. The court ordered the sale of these certificates, and they were sold at public auction to Luneta Motor Co. as the highest bidder. Nine days after the attachment, Guzco Transit sold the same certificates (plus another) to Dominador Raymundo. Both sales required approval from the Public Service Commission. The Commission approved the sale to Luneta Motor Co. and disapproved the sale to Raymundo. Raymundo appealed.

ISSUE

Whether certificates of public convenience are liable to execution and forced sale, and which of the two conflicting sales (the court-ordered auction or the subsequent voluntary sale) should prevail.

RULING

Yes, certificates of public convenience are liable to execution. The court-ordered sale to Luneta Motor Co. prevails. The Supreme Court held that a certificate of public convenience, while a limited franchise, is a valuable property interest. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, all property of a judgment debtor not exempt by law is liable to execution. The test is whether the judgment debtor has a beneficial interest that can be sold or conveyed for value. Since the Public Service Law allows the voluntary sale of such certificates with Commission approval, there is no valid reason why they cannot be taken and sold involuntarily through legal process. The Public Service Commission correctly approved the transfer to the execution creditor. The decision of the Commission was affirmed.

AI Generated by Armztrong.