[ G.R. No. L-82. December 01, 1945 ] 75 Phil. 505
[ G.R. No. L-82. December 01, 1945 ]
ANITA DE LOS REYES, PETITIONER, VS. DOLORES DE UGARTE, ASSISTED BY HER HUSBAND JUAN UGARTE, THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE AND THE SHERIFF OF MANILA, RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N
MORAN, C. J.:
On April 3, 1945, Dolores de Ugarte filed a complaint for ejectment in the Municipal Court of Manila against Anita de los Reyes, The municipal court held for Dolores de Ugarte and ordered Anita de los Reyes to vacate the premises in question, designated as 336-B Cataluna Street. From this order, Reyes appealed to the Court of First Instance of Manila.
On July 10, 1945, at the trial in the Court of First Instance of Manila, the parties through their respective attorneys, submitted a compromise-agreement for approval. In substance, the pertinent portion of the agreement provides that defendant Reyes could occupy the premises until September 15, 1945, at the same rate of rental, i. e., P30 per month, binding herself to vacate the premises on that date. Judgment was rendered in accordance with the compromise, but written notice thereof was not served upon the parties.
On September 18, 1945, Ugarte filed a motion asking for a writ of execution, which was granted. On September 19, and subsequent dates, defendant Reyes filed a motion to quash the writ of execution and a motion for relief on the ground of fraud or misrepresentation. The court denied the motion to quash the writ, and Reyes filed a motion for reconsideration, which was denied. The motion for relief was likewise denied. Hence, this petition for certiorari praying for the annulment of the writ of execution upon the ground that it was issued without jurisdiction.
Petitioner alleges that no formal notice has ever been served upon her of the judgment rendered approving the compromise. Requirement as to notice was, however, substantially complied with when petitioner acquired knowledge of the writ of execution containing a literal copy of the judgment, so much so that she later filed a motion to quash and a motion for relief. A judgment on compromise is not appealable and is immediately executory unless a motion is filed to set aside the compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, in which event an appeal may be taken from the order denying the motion, and that is petitioner’s remedy in this case and not certiorari in this Court. Petition is dismissed, without costs.
Ozaeta, Jaranilla, Feria, De Joya, Pablo, Hilado, and Bengzon, JJ., concur.