GR L 26275; (July, 1966) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-26275 July 26, 1966
BARTOLOME BARNIDO and MELENCIO BARNIDO, petitioners-appellants, vs. MARIANO BALANA and MERITO C. PERFECTO, as Justice of the Peace of Sto. Domingo, respondents-appellees.
FACTS
On July 19, 1960, the Justice of the Peace Court of Sto. Domingo, Albay, rendered judgment in Civil Case No. 34 (a suit for damages for malicious prosecution filed by Mariano Balana against the Barnido brothers) ordering the defendants to pay damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. The defendants received a copy of the decision on July 22, 1960. On August 3, 1960, they filed a notice of appeal, a cash appeal bond, and an appellate docket fee in the form of a treasurer’s certification for P24. The municipal treasurer had informed them on August 2, 1960, that only P24 was needed for the appellate docket fee, and they relied on this information. On August 4, 1960, the Justice of the Peace issued an order denying the appeal due to a P16 shortage in the appellate docket fee but stated the appeal could be admitted if the proper fees were filed. This order was received by defendants’ counsel only on August 16, 1960, though he was verbally informed on August 13, 1960. The defendants paid the additional P16 on August 15, 1960, which was after the 15-day period to perfect the appeal had expired on August 6, 1960. The Court of First Instance dismissed their petition for relief, reasoning that the municipal treasurer is not a court officer and the defendants, being represented by counsel, must have acted on his advice, so the failure was not due to mistake or excusable negligence.
ISSUE
Whether the failure of the petitioners to pay the full appellate docket fee on time constitutes excusable negligence such that their appeal should be considered perfected.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of First Instance. Applying the precedent in Tagulao v. Padlanmundok, the Court held that the petitioners substantially complied with the requirements for perfecting an appeal. Their failure to pay the correct docket fee was due to the mistake of the municipal treasurer, who informed them of an insufficient amount. The petitioners acted in good faith, relying on the treasurer, a public officer charged with duties related to the fees. To penalize a citizen for such good faith reliance is repugnant to justice. Therefore, the respondent Justice of the Peace was ordered to transmit the records of Civil Case No. 34 to the Court of First Instance of Albay for further proceedings.