Scribd
Upload
1K views

Motion For Execution Pending Appeal

1) The plaintiffs filed a motion for immediate execution of a court decision rendered on December 20, 2005 in their favor and against the defendant. 2) The defendant failed to pay the required rentals or post a supersedeas bond to stay execution during the appeal. 3) Therefore, the plaintiffs requested the court to immediately grant the order for execution of the lower court's decision in their favor.

Uploaded by

Madam Judger
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views

Motion For Execution Pending Appeal

1) The plaintiffs filed a motion for immediate execution of a court decision rendered on December 20, 2005 in their favor and against the defendant. 2) The defendant failed to pay the required rentals or post a supersedeas bond to stay execution during the appeal. 3) Therefore, the plaintiffs requested the court to immediately grant the order for execution of the lower court's decision in their favor.

Uploaded by

Madam Judger
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH 77
SAN MATEO, RIZAL

SPS. CEFIRINO S. ANTIPORDA and


LOLITA C. ANTIPORDA
Plaintiffs/Appellees,

- versus - CIVIL CASE NO.2025

RANDY BRONDIAL and all persons


claiming rights under them,
Defendants
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

MOTION FOR IMMEDIATE EXECUTION


PENDING APPEAL

COME NOW THE PLAINTIFFS, through the undersigned counsel and


before this Honorable Court, they most respectfully allege;

1. That a decision has been rendered in this case on December 20, 2005 in favor
of the Plaintiffs and against the defendant;

2. That the period for appeal for the defendant thru his counsel has already
perfected or within the period given or allowed under the rules on summary procedure,
but unfortunately the defendant himself failed to pay or deposit the required rentals or
supersedeas bond and under Section 19 Rule 70 of the Revised Rules of Summary
Procedure, as reiterated in the numerous decision of the Supreme Court, to wit:

“ Section 19. Immediate execution of judgement; how to stay


same:- if judgement is rendered against the defendant, execution shall
issue immediately upon motion, unless an appeal has been perfected and
the defendant to stay execution files a sufficient supersedeas bond,
approved by the Municipal Trial Court and executed in favor of the
plaintiff to pay rents, damages appealed from, and unless, during the
pendency of the appeal, he deposits with the appellate court the amount of
rent due from time to time under the contract, if any determined by the
judgment of the Municipal Trial Court. x x x x x “

3. And based on the records of the Court the defendant failed to deposit the
sufficient supersedeas bond or rentals awarded by the lower court in his decision on
December 20, 1967, hence the plaintiffs have no recourse but to inform and persuade the
court to grant the order for the immediate execution of the decision of the Municipal Trial
Court;

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, it is respectfully prayed


that the above-mentioned motion for immediate execution of judgment dated December
20, 1967 be immediately granted and issued in favor of the plaintiffs after the hearing of
this pending motion.

February 22, 2006


Quezon City for San Mateo, Rizal.
ATTY. ROGELIO O. MONTERO
Counsel for the Plaintiffs/Movants
Lot 56, Block1, Sampaguita Drive, Maligaya Park
Subdivision, Novaliches, Quezon City, Metro Manila
PTR NO. 7209295, Quezon City, January 09, 2006
IBP NO. 624101, Quezon City Chapter, January 09, 2006
Atty’s Roll Number 23969, March 10, 1972

THE BRANCH CLERK OF COURT,


RTC- BRANCH 77, SAN MATEO, RIZAL

G R E E T I N G S: Please submit the foregoing motion for consideration


of this Honorable Court on March 03, 2006, at 9:00 A.M.

ATTY. ROGELIO O. MONTERO

Copy Furnished:

Atty. Robert Michael A. Natividad


Counsel for the defendant
No.15 V Hilario St., Sta. Ana, San Mateo, Rizal

E X PLAN AT I O N

Considering the distance involved between the office of the undersigned counsel
and the personal address of the adverse counsel and lack of messenger to effect personal
service, he avails the services of mail to the post office in order to send the above-said
motion to the adverse counsel. Proof of which is the registry receipt issued attached to
this motion.

ATTY. ROGELIO O. MONTERO

You might also like