Radiola Toshiba Philippines Inc. vs. The Intermediate Apellate Court

G.R. No. 75222, July 18, 1991

Facts:

            The petitioner obtained a levy on the attachment against the properties of Carlos Gatmaytan and Teresita Gatmaytan un Civil case o. 35946 for collection of sum of money before the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch II, Pasig, Metro Manila. A few months later three creditors filed another petition against Gatmaytan and Teresita Gatmaytan for involuntary insolvency, docketed as special proceedings No. 1548 of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga and Angeles city.

            A favorable judgment was obtained of by the petitioner in Civil case No. 35946. The court ordered for the consolidation of ownership of petitioner over said property but respondent sheriff of Angeles City refused to issue a final ceritificate of sale because of the pending insolvency proceedings.

            Court of First Instance of Angeles City and Intermediate Appellate Court rules against petitioner

Issue:

            Whether or not the levy on attachment in favor of petitioner in dissolved by the insolvency proceedings against respondents commenced for months after the said attachment.

Held:

            Section 32 (of the Insolvency Law). As soon as an assignee is elected or appointed and qualified, the clerk of court shall, by an instrument under his hand and seal of the court, assign and convey to the assignee all the real and personal property, estate and effects of the debtor with all his deeds, books and papers relating thereto, and such assignment shall relate back to the commencement of the proceedings in insolvency, and shall relate back to the acts upon the adjudication was founded, and by operation of law shall vest the title to all such property, estate and effects in the assignee, although the same is then attached in mesne process, as the property of debtor. Such assignment shall operate to vest in the assignee all of the estate of the insolvent debtor not exempt by law from execution. It shall dissolved any attachment levied within one month next preceding the commencement of the insolvency proceedings and vacate and set aside any judgment entered in any action commenced within thirty days immediately prior to the commencement of insolvency proceedings and shall set aside any judgment entered by default or consent of the debtor within thirty days immediately prior to the commencement of insolvency proceedings.

            Section 79. When an attachment has been made and is not dissolved before the commencement of proceedings in insolvency, or is dissolved by an undertaking given by the defendant, if the claim upon which attachment suit was commenced is proved against the estate of the debtor, the plaintiff may prove the legal costs and disbursements of the suit, and in keeping of the property, and the amount thereof shall be a preferred debt.  

There is no conflicts between the two provisions.

Statutory Construction; where a statute is susceptible of more than one interpretation, court should adopt such reasonable and beneficial construction as will render the provision thereof operative and effective and harmonious with each other. – but even granting that such conflicts exists, it may be stated that in construing a statute, courts should adopt a construction that will give effect to every part of the statute, if at all possible. This rule is expressed in the maxim, ut magis valeat quam pereat or that construction is to be sought which gives effect to the whole of the statute – its every word, hence when a statute is susceptible of more than one interpretation, the court should adopt such reasonable and beneficial construction as will render the provision thereof operative and effective and harmonious with each other.