Andal v. Tonga

EN BANC A.M. No. P-02-1581 October 28, 2003 MA. CORAZON M. ANDAL, complainant, vs. NICOLAS A. TONGA, DEPUTY SHERIFF III, MTCC, LEGASPI CITY, respondent. PER CURIAM : The instant administrative case arose when Ma.

Corazon M. Andal filed a verified Complaint dated January 11, 2000, charging Nicolas A. Tonga, Deputy Sheriff III, MTCC, Legaspi City, with overcharging "unreasonably high sheriff's fees through padded expenses and imaginary charges,"1 relative to the latter's implementation of an alias writ of execution in Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) Case No. 41-98. The complainant is the president of the defendant corporation, Andamar, Incorporated, in the aforementioned case. She had earlier written to Mrs. Josefa Candia, Acting Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Rawis, Legaspi City,2 with the following averments: Sheriff Tonga claimed that when the records of the case was indorsed to your office for execution, the Sheriff of RTC in Muntinlupa, Melvin Bagubaldo, failed to attach the BPI check which represented the judgment debt, so, Sheriff Tonga allegedly went to Muntinlupa City personally in order to get it.

First, whose fault was it that the subject check was not attached to the records sent to you? Is it not Sheriff Bagubaldo? Why then should the expenses in getting it be reimbursed by us?

Are innocent litigants bound to pay for expenses caused by the inefficiencies/mistakes of government servants? Second, if the check was not included in the records sent to you is it not practical, expedient and inexpensive if you just write Sheriff Melvin Bagubaldo, to send it by mail to your good office? Time is not of the essence here.

Sheriff Nicolas Tonga has absolutely no duty to go to Muntinlupa in order to personally get the check. Third. We were not absolutely benefited by what Sheriff Nicolas Tonga has done.

In fact, as losing respondent, we were prejudiced by it. Why then should we reimburse Sheriff Nicolas Tonga when we did not send him to Muntinlupa to get that check? Let the party benefited by his act reimburse him.

Fourth. Look at how unrealistically extravagant the claim is. Does he have to take the plane in going to Manila and charge us P1,800.00 when ordinary citizens take the bus which cost only about P350.00?

Does he have to rent a car that cost P4,000.00 to go to Muntinlupa City, which is only 12 km from Makati City? Does he have to stay in Manila for 3 days, only to get one check, then charge us P2,000.00 for his 3 days (sic) accommodations? In fact, if he left October 3 and came back October 5, he was in Manila for only 2 days.

What is this, are we maintaining travelling expenses of an executive?3 Attached to this earlier letter was the list of travelling expenses purportedly incurred by the respondent in the said trip to Manila, and submitted to the complainant on October 8, 1999, to wit: Statement of actual expenses of Sheriff Nicolas A. Tonga in the implementation of the Alias Writ of Execution in CIAC Case No. 41-98 TO WIT; September 30, 1999-Transportation Expenses (Tricycle) P/160.00 October 1, 1999 - Transportation Expenses (Tricycle) ANDAL - RTC 100.00 RTC - Andamon 50.00 October 2, 1999 - Transportation Expenses Residence - Andamon 150.00 October 3, 1999- Transportation Expenses Residence - Airport 100.00 Airport - Residence (Taxi) 400.00 Plane Ticket 1,800.00 October 4, 5, 1999 Pasig - Muntinlupa City Muntinlupa City Makati ) RENT A 4,000.00 Makati - Muntinlupa City ) CAR Muntinlupa City - Pasig October 5, 1999 - 7:00 P.M. - Pasig-Philtranco Terminal Pasay (Taxi) 350.00 Bus Ticket (Pasay-Daraga) 357.00 Manila Accommodation October 3,4, 5, 1999 2,000.00 October 6, 1999 Transportation (Tricycle hired) 250.00 Meal 150.00 October 7, 1999 Transportation expenses (Tricycle) 200.00