G.R. No. 171870 - SPOUSES ANTONIO F. ALAGAR AND AURORA ALAGAR, VS. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Wherefore, finding the allegations in the Complaint proven by competent and preponderant evidence, the Court hereby renders judgment in favor of the plaintiffs as follows: 1. Ordering the defendant Philippine National Bank (PNB), Vigan, Ilocos Sur Branch, through its Manager, Mrs. Rosalia A. Quilala to release Original Certificate of Title No. 0-3576 in the name of Spouses Antonio F. Alagar and Aurora J. Alagar to the plaintiffs herein; 2. Ordering defendant PNB to pay same plaintiffs the amount of P1,825.00 as actual damages; 3. Ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiffs the amount of P100,000.00 as moral damages, P50,000.00 as exemplary damages and P30,000.00 as attorney's fees; 4. ORDERING THE DEFENDANT TO EXECUTE THE DEED SUFFICIENT IN LAW TO CANCEL THE MORTGAGE IN FAVOR OF THE PLAINTIFF-SPOUSES ANTONIO ALAGAR AND AURORA ALAGAR AND TO DELIVER SAID DEED TO THE LATTER; 5. AS AN ALTERNATIVE, SHOULD THE DEFENDANT FAIL OR REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH THE HEREINABOVE ORDER NO. 4, THE DEPUTY SHERIFF OF THIS COURT, MR. TERENCIO FLORENDO IS HEREBY APPOINTED TO EXECUTE THE DEED OF CANCELLATION OF THE MORTGAGE IN SUIT IN BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT PNB FOR REGISTRATION IN THE REGISTRY OF DEEDS OF ILOCOS SUR. The counterclaim not having been proven, the same is dismissed. [21] The Alagars filed a motion for reconsideration of the above insofar as it granted PNB's motion for reconsideration of the August 4, 2003 order and motion to dismiss the petition for indirect contempt. On December 18, 2003 the RTC issued an order, [22] granting the Alagars' motion for reconsideration and reinstating its August 4, 2003 order that directed the issuance of a writ of execution. The order also deleted paragraphs 4 and 5 of the amended dispositive portion of the decision, thus reinstating the original version. PNB moved for reconsideration of the RTC's December 18, 2003 order and prayed that the proceedings be held in abeyance in view of CA-G.R. SP 71116 which was pending before the CA. But the RTC denied the motion on March 11, 2004, stating that it had the inherent power to amend its decision to make it conform to law and justice. It also declined to hold matters in abeyance since the RTC had not been amply informed about the CA action and since there was no possibility that the issues before the CA would be rendered moot if the proceedings below continued. [23] In view of the trial court's conflicting directives, PNB filed a motion for clarification of the March 11, 2004 order. Further, on June 3, 2004 it also filed a supplemental petition [24] in CA-G.R. SP 71116, assailing all the RTC actions and orders subsequent to the filing of the original petition. On June 14, 2004 the RTC issued an order, [25] resolving PNB's motion for clarification and recalling in the meantime the writ of execution that it issued on August 4, 2003. It also deleted paragraph 5 of the amended dispositive portion of its decision but retained paragraph 4 ordering PNB to execute a deed of cancellation of