Master Tours and Travel Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, Et Al., G.R. No. 105409, 1 March 1993
Master Tours and Travel Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, Et Al., G.R. No. 105409, 1 March 1993
Master Tours and Travel Corp. vs. Court of Appeals, Et Al., G.R. No. 105409, 1 March 1993
SYLLABUS
DECISION
PADILLA, J : p
The Facts:
On 28 February 1991, summons together with a copy of the complaint for sum
of money filed by the private respondent Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. (Cathay)
and an Order of Attachment dated 21 February 1991 were served upon and
received by the petitioner. Pursuant to the Order of Attachment, the sheriff
immediately levied upon properties of the petitioner, with value equivalent to
Cathay's claim. LLjur
On 25 March 1991, defendant therein (herein petitioner) moved to set aside the
order of attachment on the grounds that there had been no prior notice or
hearing before the issuance of the writ and that the averments of the complaint
failed to satisfactorily allege the basis for attachment as required by the Rules
of Court. Pending resolution of this motion, petitioner filed its answer to
Cathay's complaint. On 29 April 1991, the trial court issued an order denying
the petitioner's motion to set aside or discharge the attachment writ; petitioner
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
thereupon moved for reconsideration.
Faced with this predicament, the petitioner resorted to a petition for certiorari
with the Court of Appeals, but the latter court denied due course to the same as
the trial court had yet to rule on petitioner's twin motions for reconsideration
and withdrawal or compromise agreement.
Finally, on 17 October 1991, the trial court issued an order denying petitioner's
twin motions. Petitioner again took recourse to the respondent appellate court,
but after hearing both parties, the appellate court ruled to dismiss the petition.
Hence, this petition for review.
Davao Light and Power, Co., Inc. vs. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 93262,
November 29, 1991, 204 SCRA 343) lays down the rules on the issuance of
writs of attachment ex-parte:
"A preliminary attachment may be defined, paraphrasing the Rules of
Court, as the provisional remedy in virtue of which a plaintiff or other
proper party may, at the commencement of the action or at any time
thereafter, have the property of the adverse party taken into the
custody of the court as security for the satisfaction of any judgment
that may be recovered. It is a remedy which is purely statutory in
respect of which the law requires a strict construction of the provisions
granting it. Withal no principle, statutory or jurisprudential, prohibits its
issuance by any court before acquisition of jurisdiction over the person
of the defendant.