DIGEST/ ANA CHRISTEL ANGELES/ GREGORIO LIMPOT LUMAPAS vs. JUDGE CAMILO E. TAMIN, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MOLAVE, ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR, BRANCH 23

A.M. No. RTJ-99-1519  June 27, 2000 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 97-438-RTJ)

GREGORIO LIMPOT LUMAPAS vs. JUDGE CAMILO E. TAMIN, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MOLAVE, ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR, BRANCH 23

FACTS:

This case is an administrative complaint against respondent Judge Camilo Tamin of the RTC of Molave Zamboanga del Sur for the obstinate refusal  to issue a writ of execution of the final and executory judgment in favor of complainant Gregorio Limpot Lumapas despite the CA’s grant of Writ of Mandamus ordering him to do so.

Complainant also alleged that it was in defiance of Court’s Resolution A.M. Bo. RTJ-99-1519 dated June 27, 2000 wherein respondent was ordered to pay a fine for failing to fulfil the ministerial duty of issuing a writ of execution in the above-stated case and to obey the writ of mandamus issued by the CA relative thereto.

In his comment, respondent challenged this Court’s jurisdiction to entertain the complaint. He also claimed that the CA in its decision awarded to the complainant only  a conditional right of possession to the land in question conditioned upon the validity of his title to be determined in an appropriate proceeding.

ISSUE:

Whether Judge Tamin erred in refusing  to issue the writ of execution of the decision of the Court of Appeals despite the standing Writ of Mandamus.

RULING:

Yes.  Judge Tamin erred in refusing to issue the writ of execution of the decision of the Court of Appeals despite the standing Writ of Mandamus.

A writ of mandamus lies to compel the issuance of a writ of execution. The writ of mandamus is one commanding a tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person that or who unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled, and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law . Mandamus literally means "we command." Here, the issuance of a writ of execution is a ministerial duty on the part of the court, after a judgment becomes final and executory, and leaves no room for the exercise of discretion. In this case, the decision of the Court of Appeals became final and executory on March 13, 1995. Respondent was duty bound to grant complainant's petition filed on December 6, 1995, for the issuance of the writ.

Judge Tamin had no option but to obey the writ. Refusal to obey it is clearly a violation of the order of, and a manifest disrespect towards, a court of superior jurisdiction.