8. Ramil - Torres Vs Satsatin.docx

XXXVII.8 PROVISIONAL REMEDIES SOFIA TORRES, FRUCTOSA TORRES, HEIRS OF MARIO TORRES and SOLAR RESOURCES, INC. SOLAR RESOURCES, INC., petitioners, vs . vs. NICANOR SATSATIN, NICANOR SATSATIN, EMILINDA AUSTRIA SATSATIN, NIKKI NORMEL SATSATIN and EMILINDA AUSTRIA SATSATIN, NIKKI NORMEL SATSATIN and NIKKI NORLIN SATSATIN NIKKI NORLIN SATSATIN, respondents. GR 166759 November 25, 2009 FACTS The siblings Torres through their mother authorized Nicanor Satsatin to sell their land for P28M which was bought by Solar Resources. Petitoners claimed that Solar had already paid the entire purchase price but only P9M was remitted to them which led to the filing of complaint. When the petitioners learned that the Satsatin family are about to depart from the Philippines they file an Ex Party Motion for the Issuance of Writ of Attachment. RTC granted the motion but the respondents argued that the writ was improper and irregular having been issued and enforde without the lower court acquring jurisdiction over the persons of the respondents. CA in favor of the respondents hence this petition. ISSUE Whether the writ of attachment issued by the RTC is valid? RULING NO The preliminary attachment musst be served after or simultaneous with the service of summons on the defendant whether by personal service, substituted service or by publication as warranted by the circumstance of the case. The subsequent service of summons does not confer a retroactive acquisition of jurisdiction over her person becaus the law does not allow for retroactivity of a belated service.