Scalawag courts (3)
UNTIL NOW, this Caloocan RTC, for reasons only it can divine, has not yet disposed of the petition for consignation, fueling speculation it may have taken “unusual interest” in the P337 million in deposit.
What, for the time being, happened to this amount?
Has it found its way to a bank, on time deposit (which has not yet matured)?
Has it been invested in business?
These are questions the stockholders of both PNCC and MNTC now raise.
Impatient over the Caloocan court’s debilitating delay, the parties to the consignation petition filed, in August 10, 2011, filed therewith a Joint Motion To Release Amount to the National Treasury.
But until this time, to, this court has not resolved the remittance issue.
Trouble is that the Natio-nal Government now wants this P337 million.
But how could this be possible when this Caloocan City court seems to be tenaciously holding on to it.
The Pasay RTC, on the other hand, is immersed in a similar story, albeit involving a smaller amount: only P16 million.
You see, PNCC has a 13-hectare piece of realty located in the Macapagal Avenue area, which it leases to various lessees, one of which is Ley Construction Corporation (“Ley”).
When the lease contract between PNCC and Ley expired, the former formally demanded that the latter vacate the leased premises.
Ley, however, refused, compelling PNCC to sue for ejectment (unlawful detainer) with the Pasay City Court.
Ley appealed to the Pasay Regional Trial Court, and pending such appeal, Ley did not pay rentals in arrears, opting, instead, to consign/deposit the same with this RTC.
PNCC won the appeal, holding, among others, that back rentals in consignation should now be released to it, whether or not Ley subsequently goes up to the Court of Appeals on certiorari. (TO BE CONTINUED)