Cathay Metal v. Laguna West, West , G.R. No. 172204, July 2, 2014 Topic: opic: Rule 14,. Sec. 11. Service Service upon domestic domestic private uridical uridical entity, entity, Sec. ec. 14. 14. Service Service upon de!endant "#ose identity identity or "#erea$outs are un%no"n Facts: Respondent &a'una (est )ulti*+urpose ooperative is a cooperative reco'ni-ed under Repu$lic ct No. //7 or t#e ompre#ensive 'rarian Re!orm &a". t alle'edly entered into a oint venture a'reement "it# !armer*$ene!iciaries !armer*$ene!iciaries t#rou'# erti!icates o! &and "ners#ip "ard "ard 3& in Silan', avite. (#ile respondent "as ne'otiatin' "it# t#e !armer*$ene!iciaries, !armer*$ene!iciaries, petitioner at#ay )etal orporation entered into rrevoca$le 56clusive 56clusive Ri'#t to uy 35R contracts "it# t#e same !armer*$ene!iciaries. !armer*$ene!iciaries. 8nder t#e 5R, t#e !armer*$ene!iciaries !armer*$ene!iciaries committed t#emselves to sell to petitioner t#eir a'ricultural properties upon conversion to industrial or commercial properties or upon e6piration o! t#e period o! pro#i$ition !rom trans!errin' title to t#e properties. n 199/, &a'una (est )ulti*+urpose ooperative caused t#e annotation o! its adverse claim on t#e !armer*$ene!iciaries certi!icates o! title. n 1999, at#ay )etal and t#e !armer*$ene!iciaries !armer*$ene!iciaries e6ecuted contracts o! sale o! t#e properties. Trans!er certi!icates certi!icates o! title "ere also issued in t#e name o! at#ay )etal. &a'una (est )ulti*+urpose ooperative, t#rou'# its ;ice +resident, )r. dela +e
Laguna .> T#e petition petition "as returned returned to sender $ecause responden respondentt could not $e !ound at t#at address. address. T#e postman postman issued a certi!icat certi!ication ion statin' statin' t#at t#e reason !or t#e return "as t#at t#e ?cooperati ?cooperative ve @"asA not e6istin'.> e6istin'.> $et%t%oner allegedly allegedly atte#ted to serve the #et%t%on u#on res#ondent #ersonally. #ersonally. &o'ever, th%s th%s serv%ce (a%led (or the sae reason. reason. 8pon at#ay )etals motion, t#e Re'ional Trial ourt issued an order on Becem$er 1, 2000 declarin' petitioners su$stituted service, apparently $y re'istered mail, to #ave $een e!!ected, t#us &a'una (est )ulti*+urpose ooperative is #ere$y 'iven a period o! !i!teen 31 days !rom t#e delivery o! said pleadin's to t#e ler% o! ourt "it#in "#ic# to !ile t#eir opposition to t#e onsolidated petition !or cancellation o! adverse claim. Respondent, t#rou'# )r. rlando dela +e
n t#is case, petitioner served summons upon respondent $y re'istered mail and, alle'edly, $y personal service at t#e o!!ice address indicated in respondents erti!icate o! Re'istration. Summons "as not served upon respondents o!!icers. t "as also not pu$lis#ed in accordance "it# t#e Rules o! ourt. s a result, respondent "as not 'iven an opportunity to present evidence, and petitioner "as a$le to o$tain !rom t#e Re'ional Trial ourt an order cancellin' respondents annotations o! adverse claims. Sect%on 11, ule 14 o( the ules o( Court #rov%des the rule on serv%ce o( suons u#on a -ur%d%cal ent%ty. +t #rov%des that suons ay !e served u#on a -ur%d%cal ent%ty only through %ts o((%cers. hus: Sec. 11. Service upon domestic private uridical entity. F (#en t#e de!endant is a corporation, partners#ip or association or'ani-ed under t#e la"s o! t#e +#ilippines "it# a uridical personality, service may $e made on t#e president, mana'in' partner, 'eneral mana'er, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in*#ouse counsel. (e #ave already esta$lis#ed t#at t#e enumeration in Section 11 o! Rule 14 is e6clusive. Service o! summons upon persons ot#er t#an t#ose o!!icers enumerated in Section 11 is invalid. ! summons may not $e served upon t#ese persons personally at t#eir residences or o!!ices, summons may $e served upon any o! t#e o!!icers "#erever t#ey may $e !ound. T#e Rules o! ourt provides t#at notices s#ould $e sent to t#e enumerated o!!icers. +etitioner !ailed to do t#is. No notice "as ever sent to any o! t#e enumerated o!!icers. ourt 'overns court procedures, includin' t#e rules on service o! notices and summons. T#e ooperative ode on notices cannot replace t#e rules on summons under t#e Rules o! ourt. Rule 14, Section 11 o! t#e Rules o! ourt provides an*e6clusive enumeration o! t#e persons aut#ori-ed to receive summons !or uridical entities. T#ese persons are t#e uridical entity=s president, mana'in' partner, 'eneral 1 mana'er, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in*#ouse counsel. T#e ooperative ode provisions may 'overn matters relatin' to cooperatives activities as administered $y t#e ooperative Bevelopment ut#ority. o"ever, t#ey are not procedural rules t#at "ill 'overn court processes. ooperative ode provision reEuirin' cooperatives to #ave an o!!icial address to "#ic# all notices and communications s#all $e sent cannot ta%e t#e place o! t#e rules on summons under t#e Rules o! ourt concernin' a court proceedin'.
+etitioner insists t#at it s#ould not $e made to inEuire !urt#er as to t#e "#erea$outs o! respondent a!ter t#e attempt to serve t#e summons $y re'istered mail to respondents address as alle'edly indicated in its rticles o! ncorporation. T#e Rules does not provide t#at it needs to do so. &o'ever, %t #rov%des (or serv%ce !y #u!l%cat%on. Serv%ce !y #u!l%cat%on %s ava%la!le 'hen the 'herea!outs o( the de(endant %s un/no'n. Section 14, Rule 14 o! t#e Rules o! ourt provides: Sec. 14. Service upon de!endant "#ose identity or "#erea$outs are un%no"n. F n any action "#ere t#e de!endant is desi'nated as an un%no"n o"ner, or t#e li%e, or "#enever #is "#erea$outs are un%no"n and cannot $e ascertained $y dili'ent inEuiry, service may, $y leave o! court, $e e!!ected upon #im $y pu$lication in a ne"spaper o! 'eneral circulation and in suc# places and !or suc# time as t#e court may order. T#is is not a matter o! acEuirin' urisdiction over t#e person o! respondent since t#is is an action in rem. n an action in rem, urisdiction over t#e person is not reEuired as lon' as t#ere is urisdiction over t#e res. T#is case involves t#e issue o! !air play and ensurin' t#at parties are accorded due process.
