Valencia, respondents. Facts: Petitioner's/Plaintiff's claim/s

G.R. No. 103590
January 29, 1993
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, petitioner,
vs.
HON. COURT OF APPEALS, THE PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF CAVITE
and VICTOR G. VALENCIA, respondents.
FACTS:
1. Petitioner's/Plaintiff's claims (no more than 3 sentences)
Queen's Row Subdivision, Inc. (QRSI) entered into a construction project agreement with the petitioner, Government Service Insurance
System (GSIS), under which the latter agreed to extend the former a financing loan for the construction and development of a residential subdivision in Molino, Bacoor, Cavite, consisting of approximately four thousand four hundred ninety-three (4,493) housing units such units will be sold to GSIS members in conformity with the housing program of the
System. Eventually, QRSI engaged in a construction contract with private respondent Valencia for various phases of land development in the abovementioned subdivision following the project agreement.
Three days after filing an Urgent Motion for Reconsideration, the
GSIS paid respondent Valencia a portion of the withheld money held for the account of QRSI in the amount of 154,476.14, and then on September 18,
₱
1986, the petitioner filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the
Court of Appeals, seeking to vacate the aforementioned Orders of July 5,
1985, May 22, 1986, and July 10, 1986, as well as the alias writ of execution of June 9, 1986 and the Notice of Garnishment of June 10, 1986.

2. Respondent's/Defendant's claims (no more than 3 sentences)
Valencia sought payment from QRSI after completing and performing his contractual obligations. However, the company declined to pay despite several demands. Valencia then filed a complaint in Civil Case No. BCV-78-
33, a monetary action with a preliminary attachment writ request.
3. Decisions of the lower courts (e.g. RTC, CA)
The trial court rendered its decision on March 2, 1982, ordering the defendant QRSI to pay Valencia the sum of 448,374.01 for the first cause
₱
of action the sum of 204,821.32 for the second cause of action and the
₱
sum of 102,866.37 for the third cause of action, as well as to return to the
₱
plaintiff the amount of 10,000 posted as performance bond the same
₱
amounts to be recovered by the plaintiff shall bear a legal rate of interest from the date of demands on February 10, 1974, September 13, 1976, and
February 3, 1977, for the first, second and third causes of action,
respectively. On top of that, the plaintiff will be reimbursed attorney's fees at the rate of 20% of the amounts ordered recovered and payable to Valencia.
Meanwhile, it directs the GSIS to hold any amounts awarded to,
retained by, and obtained for QRSI and to provide them to the plaintiff as payment to the aforementioned amount ordered recovered by him, with the same to be credited as payment made by QRSI. According to the court, the
GSIS shall not be personally liable for the said obligation of its co- defendant, except as herein above-ordered; however, defendants are ordered to respect and satisfy the contractor's lien in favor of the plaintiff as provided bylaw. The costs are hereby ordered to be paid by QRSI. All other claims and counterclaims are also dismissed.

It was determined that the petitioner was holding funds for QRSI, so the court ordered it to pay Valencia and Valeriano Espiritu the amount assessed and covered by the writs of execution after deducting earlier payments. Petitioner's subsequent move for reconsideration was also denied.
On the other hand, the appellate court dismissed the aforementioned petition primarily on the grounds that the trial court's decision of March 2,
1982 "has long become final" because neither QRSI nor the above petitioner appealed it within the reglementary period.
The GSIS was ordered to deposit in court or pay the plaintiff the amounts of the principal at 12% annual simple interest and litigation fees less payment already made within five (5) days of receipt of this order;
otherwise, the Clerk of Court is directed to issue the corresponding alias writ of execution for the stated amounts.
Issue/s (one sentence)
Whether or not the respondent Court of Appeals made reversible mistake in reversing its own decision of June 28, 1991 on the grounds of res judicata and estoppel.
HELD:
4. Disposition of the case (one sentence)
The instant petition is granted, and the respondent Court's decision of
January 15, 1992 in CA-G.R. SP No. 24021 is set aside, while its decision dated June 28, 1991 is hereby reinstated and affirmed costs are levied against the private respondent.

5. Dictum (no more than five sentences addressing the issue relevant
to the topic under discussion)
The contention that the petitioner is estopped from challenging the interest rate since it has made some payments is untenable. GSIS is a government agency that serves as an administrative body, and thus, its representatives are public servants. The general rule is that errors,
mistakes, or omissions of the government's officials or agents do not bar the government from proceeding. This was evident in the petitioner's case due to the fiduciary nature of its management, which is "made stricter by the fact that the funds under its administration are partly contributed by the thousands upon thousands of employees and workers in all the branches and instrumentalities of the government."