G.R. No. 147800 - UNITED COCONUT PLANTERS BANK, VS. TEOFILO C. RAMOS.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of the Honorable Regional Trial Court that after due hearing, judgment be rendered in his favor by ordering defendants jointly and severally, to pay as follows: P3,000,000.00 as moral damages; 300,000.00 as exemplary damages; 200,000.00 as actual damages; 200,000.00 as attorney's fees; Cost of suit. [19] In its answer, the petitioner, while admitting that it made a mistake in causing the annotation of notice of levy on the TCT of the respondent, denied that it was motivated by malice and bad faith. The petitioner alleged that after ascertaining that it indeed made a mistake, it proposed that the respondent file a motion to cancel levy with a promise that it would not oppose the said motion. However, the respondent dilly-dallied and failed to file the said motion; forthwith, if any damages were sustained by the respondent, it was because it took him quite a long time to file the motion. The petitioner should not thus be made to suffer for the consequences of the respondent's delay. The petitioner further asserted that it had no knowledge that there were two persons bearing the same name Teofilo Ramos; it was only when Sheriff Villapaña notified the petitioner that a certain Teofilo C. Ramos who appeared to be the registered owner of TCT No. 275167 that it learned for the first time the notice of levy on the respondent's property; forthwith, the petitioner held in abeyance the sale of the levied property at public auction; barred by the failure of the respondent to file a third-party claim in Civil Case No. 16453, the petitioner could not cause the removal of the levy; in lieu thereof, it suggested to the respondent the filing of a motion to cancel levy and that the petitioner will not oppose such motion; surprisingly, it was only on April 12, 1994 that the respondent filed such motion; the petitioner was thus surprised that the respondent filed an action for damages against it for his failure to secure a timely loan from the UCPB and PDB. The petitioner thus prayed: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court that judgment be rendered in favor of defendant UCPB, dismissing the complaint in toto and ordering the plaintiff to: pay moral damages in the amount of PESOS: THREE MILLION P3,000,000.00 and exemplary damages in the amount of PESOS: FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND P500,000.00; pay attorney's fees and litigation expenses in an amount of not less than PESOS: TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND P200,000.00; Other reliefs and remedies deemed just and equitable under the premises are also prayed for. [20] In the meantime, in 1995, PDB released the proceeds of the loan of Ramdustrial Corporation which the latter remitted to UCPB. On March 4, 1997, the RTC rendered a decision in favor of the respondent. The complaint against Sheriff Villapaña was dismissed on the ground that he was merely performing his duties. The decretal part of the decision is herein quote