GENTLE SUPREME PHILIPPINES, INC. vs. RICARDO F. CONSULTA G.R. No. 183182 Septeme! 1, 2"1" This case is about the service of summons on a corporation and its officers, allegedly done improperly, resulting in the failure of the trial court to acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the defendants and in the nullity of its proceedings. FACTS# Petitioner FACTS# Petitioner Gentle Supreme Philippines, Inc. (GSP filed a collection case !ith application application for a !rit of preliminary preliminary attachment attachment against "onsar Trading Trading "orporation "orporation ("T", ("T", its preside president nt #icard #icardo o "onsul "onsulta ta ("onsul ("onsulta ta,, and its vice$pr vice$presi esident dent,, %orbert %orberto o Sarayb Sarayba a (Saray (Sarayba ba before before the #T" of Pasig Pasig "ity "ity. GSP alleged alleged that that "T", "T", throug through h "onsulta and Sarayba, bought certain merchandise from it but refused to pay for them. The sheriff failed to serve the summons and copies of the complaint on any of "T"&s auth author ori' i'ed ed offi office cers rs as !ell !ell as on "onsu "onsult lta a and and Saray Sarayba, ba, he left left copi copies es of such such documents !ith gnes "anave ("anave !ho, according to the sheriff&s return, !as Sarayba&s secretary and an authori'ed representative of both Sarayba and "onsulta. %one of the defendants defendants filed an ans!er to the complaint. complaint. fter fter trial, the #T" ruled that having defrauded GSP, defendant defendants s "T", "onsulta, and Sarayba Sarayba !ere solidarily solidarily liable for the value of the supplied goods plus attorney&s fees and costs of the suit. nd upon motion, the #T" issued a !rit of e)ecution against the defendants. #espondent "onsulta filed a petition for annulment of the #T" decision before the "ourt of ppeals (" on the ground that he !as not properly served !ith summons beca because use,, alth althou ough gh his his addr address ess stat stated ed in the the comp compla lain intt !as !as his his regul regular ar place place of business, "anave, !ho received the summons, !as not in charge of the matter. ISSUE# *hether *hether or not there !as a valid service service of summons at defendan defendant&s t&s place place of business. HELD# +S.There HELD# +S.There is valid substituted substituted service of summons summons on "onsulta at his place of business !ith some competent person in charge thereof. ccording to the sheriff&s return, !hich is prima facie evidence of the facts it states, he served a copy of the compla complaint int on "anave, "anave, an author authori'ed i'ed represe representa ntativ tive e of both both "onsul "onsulta ta and Sarayba Sarayba.. -esi -esides des "onsu "onsult lta& a&s s bare bare alle allega gati tions ons,, he did did not not prese present nt evide evidence nce to rebut rebut the the presumption of regularity on the manner that the sheriff performed his official duty. %or did "onsulta present clear and convincing evidence that "anave !as not competent to receive the summons and the attached documents for him. In fact, "anave !as a person charged !ith authority to receive court documents for the company as !ell as its officers officers !ho held office in that company. company. bsent bsent contrary evidence, evidence, the veracity veracity of the return&s content and its effectiveness stand.
The "ourt has ruled that $%t %s &ot &e'ess(!) t*(t t*e pe!so& %& '*(!+e o t*e -ee&-(&ts !e+/0(! p0('e o /s%&ess e spe'%%'(00) (/t*o!%e- to !e'e%ve t*e s/mmo&s. It %s e&o/+* t*(t *e (ppe(!s to e %& '*(!+e.$ In this case, "anave, a secretary !hose job description necessarily includes receiving documents and other correspondence, !ould have the semblance of authority to accept the court documents. urther, "onsulta does not deny a that summons had been properly served on Sarayba, his vice$president, through "anave at the company&s office/ b that the summons on him !as served on the same occasion also through "anave/ c that the sheriff had succeeded in garnishing his company&s ban0 deposits/ and d that his company subsequently made an offer to settle the judgment against it. The "ourt is not dumb as to believe that "onsulta became a!are of the suit only !hen the sheriff served a notice of e)ecution sale covering his house and lot.
