The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed a Tagaytay City judge for irregularities in ruling on a property case.
The high court found former Judge Edwin Larida Jr. of Tagaytay City Regional Trial Court Branch 18 guilty of grave misconduct and gross ignorance of the law.
He was ordered dismissed from service with forfeiture of retirement benefits and with prejudice against re-employment in any branch of government.
“His act of issuing a falsified decision raises a serious question on his competence and integrity in the performance of his function as a magistrate. Thus, to protect and preserve the image and integrity of the entire judiciary, we are constrained to impose the dismissal in this case.” the SC said in a decision published online Sunday.
Larida accused his staff of intentionally removing copies of a decision he supposedly issued on March 14, 2008 and a certificate of finality dated April 18, 2008.
He said his staff misled the next judge who handled the case into believing that the case remained pending when in fact it was already decided by him.
The 2008 decision granted a petition by litigant Annabella Ocampo for the issuance of new owner’s copies of title in favor of a certain Clarito Poblete.
In 2002, the properties were bought by the Original Development and Construction Corp. (Odecor) while the titles were not yet canceled and still in the name of the registered owner, Victorino Angcaya.
Odecor then initiated an administrative case against Larida, claiming that no copy of the 2008 decision was included in the records of the land case for a new title.
The court employees certified that the case was still pending and in 2010, the new judge, Emma Young, dismissed Ocampo’s petition for a new title.
Larida filed the administrative complaint, claiming that his decision of March 2008 was released and served upon the proper parties and duly recorded in the Registry of Deeds.
The staff members accused of removal of records filed a counter-complaint, claiming the Larida connived with the parties to falsify the certification of finality supposedly issued by the Clerk of Court, Stanley Calma, and two official receipts.
Court of Appeals Justice Ma. Luisa Quijano-Padilla, assigned to investigate the administrative case, said in her report in 2015 that there was “overwhelming evidence to disprove Judge Larida’s claim of the authenticity of the decision, supposedly dated March 14, 2008”.
The investigation noted that hearings on the case were actually scheduled by Larida on January 4 and February 4, March 28, June 20, August 22 and October 3 of the same year after Ocampo and her counsel failed to appear.
Padilla said the issuance of a decision dated March 14, 2008 “is highly suspect” as it came despite orders for resetting hearings on the case.
Even after Young took over the case, the parties still failed to appear during the hearing.
The administrative charges Larida filed against Calma, legal researcher Diana Ruiz, court stenographer Ligaya Batino, and clerk Anita Goboy for serious misconduct, falsification of public documents, and serious neglect of duty were thrown out by the SC “for utter lack of merit”.
“There was absolutely no evidence showing that they committed the infractions imputed against them. Hence, the complaint against them ought to be dismissed,” the SC ruled.
Source: United News of Bangladesh