Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 97 views

    Alcantara vs. Abbas, 9 SCRA 54

    Uploaded by

    Dara Compuesto
    1) Alcantara sued Bacaron to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a tractor. Alcantara was appointed receiver of the tractor by the court. 2) Bacaron then petitioned to have Alcantara relieved as receiver, claiming neglect of duties. The court relieved Alcantara and appointed Bacaron receiver without requiring a bond. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court erred in relieving Alcantara as receiver and appointing the defendant Bacaron without a bond, as a receiver should be impartial and disinterested in the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Alcantara vs. Abbas, 9 SCRA 54

    Uploaded by

    Dara Compuesto
    97 views2 pages
    1) Alcantara sued Bacaron to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a tractor. Alcantara was appointed receiver of the tractor by the court. 2) Bacaron then petitioned to have Alcantara relieved as receiver, claiming neglect of duties. The court relieved Alcantara and appointed Bacaron receiver without requiring a bond. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court erred in relieving Alcantara as receiver and appointing the defendant Bacaron without a bond, as a receiver should be impartial and disinterested in the case.

    Original Description:

    ProvRem

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Alcantara sued Bacaron to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a tractor. Alcantara was appointed receiver of the tractor by the court. 2) Bacaron then petitioned to have Alcantara relieved as receiver, claiming neglect of duties. The court relieved Alcantara and appointed Bacaron receiver without requiring a bond. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court erred in relieving Alcantara as receiver and appointing the defendant Bacaron without a bond, as a receiver should be impartial and disinterested in the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    97 views2 pages

    Alcantara vs. Abbas, 9 SCRA 54

    Uploaded by

    Dara Compuesto
    1) Alcantara sued Bacaron to foreclose a chattel mortgage on a tractor. Alcantara was appointed receiver of the tractor by the court. 2) Bacaron then petitioned to have Alcantara relieved as receiver, claiming neglect of duties. The court relieved Alcantara and appointed Bacaron receiver without requiring a bond. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that the lower court erred in relieving Alcantara as receiver and appointing the defendant Bacaron without a bond, as a receiver should be impartial and disinterested in the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Alcantara vs. Abbass, (G.R. No.

    L-14890 September 30, 1963)


    Facts:
    In March, 1957, Conrado Alcantara sued Martin Bacaron partly to foreclose the chattel mortgage
    executed by the latter on a caterpillar tractor with its accessories. Pursuant to a clause in the
    mortgage contract, the Davao court designated Alcantara as receiver of the tractor. With the
    court's approval, he leased the machine to Serapio Sablada. Upon the expiration of the lease, and
    after Sablada's failure to return the machine and he was declared by the court to be in contempt
    of court.
    Meanwhile, alleging that Alcantara had neglected his duties as receiver, Bacaron petitioned the
    court to relieve such receiver, and to appoint him as the receiver instead. Respondent judge of the
    Davao court, issued an order relieving Alcantara and appointed Bacaron as receiver of the
    tractor, without bond, with authority to receive the sum of P2,000.00 in Alcantara's hands as
    rentals of the tractor, and to the end the same for repairs if necessary.
    Alcantara filed his motion for reconsideration, however the court denied. Hence, this instant
    petition for special civil action.
    Issue:
    (a) Whether or not the court erred in relieving Alcantara as receiver and thereby
    replacing him with Bacaron.
    (b) Whether or not a receiver may be appointed in the absence of bond.
    Ruling:
    a. Yes. It appears that acting on the complaint of Alcantara, the court required Sablada
    under pain of contempt, to deliver the tractor. It also appears that upon Sablada's failure, he was
    declared to be contempt. The order directed Alcantara to take steps to recover possession of the
    tractor, with the admonition that "should he fail to take possession of the tractor within fifteen
    (15) days after notice thereof, he may relieved as receiver and the defendant who is willing to be
    the receiver may be appointed in his place".
    It is not clear what steps the court had in mind when it declared that "plaintiff-receiver failed to
    take steps to take possession of the tractor leased to Sablada". It could have meant that Alcantara
    failed to take the tractor directly from the hands of Sablada from the place where it was, without
    resorting to official help. If the court meant — as it must have meant — that Alcantara failed to
    exhaust judicial remedies to compel Sablada to comply with the order to place the tractor at the
    "junction" previously mentioned, then it fell into error, because Alcantara had in effect,
    suggested that Sablada be held in "continuous contempt" i.e., imprisoned until he placed the
    tractor at the "junction"; and the court instead of acting accordingly under Rule 64, sec. 7 held
    Alcantara to be negligent, and removed him.
    In this connection, it should be observed that in his aforesaid pleading of November 26, 1958,
    Alcantara even asked for permission to sue Sablada for replevin.
    b. Yes. The general rule is that neither to a litigation should be appointed receiver without
    the other's consent because "a receiver ought to be an indifferent person between the parties" and
    "should be impartial and disinterested". In this case, Bacaron was the defendant of the case and
    was appointed, as receiver without bond, over the objection of Alcantara.. Note that Bacaron was
    the defendant, and his personal interest would conflict with his duties to the court and the
    plaintiff. Furthermore, under the Rules of Court, the receiver must file a bond; and yet Bacaron
    was exempted from such obligation. The effect of the whole proceeding was to discharge the
    receiver ship at the request of the defendant, without so much a bond is contrary to sec. 4, Rule
    61, of the Rules of Court.

    You might also like