UNITED PHILIPPINE LINES, INC., PETITIONER, VS. GODOFREDO DEANG, RESPONDENT.

On January 8, 1969,
Hearing Officer and Referee Exequiel E. Sison made an award in the total sum of P5,886.58 in favor of Godofredo Deang in Wage Compensa­tion Case No. 2179 against the
United Philippine Lines, Inc. who had failed to controvert the claim.  On Febru­ary 13, 1969, the latter filed a Motion to Set Aside the Award, but
the Referee denied the same, the order of de­nial providing further that
“benefits received under Section 14 (temporary total disability) by the
claimant (respondent) shall be deducted from the amount of the award (of
January 8, 1966).”

Subsequently, because petitioner filed a motion for the reconsideration of the above-mentioned order of
Febru­ary 25, 1969, the
record of the case was elevated to the Workmen’s Compensation Commission.  On May
18, 1970, the chairman thereof ordered the remanding of the record
to Regional Office No. 3 of San Fernando,
Pampanga, upon the ground that the award sought to be
set aside had already become final and executory.  On the 29th of the same month, petitioner
appealed to the Commission en banc from this Order of May 18, 1970, but the appeal was not
sustained.

Subsequently, or more specifically on August 4, 1970, the
Chairman of the Commission issued a writ of execution and pursuant thereto the
Office of the Sheriff of the City of Manila garnished the sum of P5,993.33
deposited in peti­tioner’s name with the First National City Bank of New York
at Juan Luna, Manila.  In view thereof,
petitioner filed on August 26, 1970 a Motion To Set Aside the writ of
execution, attaching thereto copies of 59 receipts signed by respondent
evidencing the receipt by the latter of the total amount of P4,249.78 as benefits due under the Order of February 25,
1969, claiming that the only remaining amount due to the respondent was the sum
of P1,636.80.  However, during the
hearing held in connection with petitioner’s motion, the Hearing Officer
refused to allow it to present as its evi­dence the originals of the aforesaid
59 receipts.  Finally, on January 28, 1971, the Commission
denied petitioner’s Motion To Set Aside the writ of
execution.  It appears, however, that
since October 27, 1970,
that is, even before resolving
the aforesaid Motion To Set Aside the writ of execution, the Commission had
already authorized the pay­ment to the respondent of the sum of P1,636.80, retaining in its custody the remainder of the
garnished amount.

It appearing from the foregoing facts that the Referee’s Order of
February 25, 1969 providing for the deduction of the benefits received by the
respondent from the total amount of the award in his favor did not consti­tute
an amendment of the award of compensation, such deduction being in reality a
mere incident in the execution of said award; it appearing further that
petitioner was denied the right to prove, with the presentation of relevant re­ceipts,
the actual payments already made to the respondent on account of the award made
in his favor; the Court re­solves to dismiss, as it hereby dismisses the
present case, but without prejudice (a) to the right of petitioner to present
either to the Commission or to the Sheriff in charge of executing the
Commission’s award, the 59 receipts mentioned in the basic petition, and (b) to
the deduction of the total amount evidenced thereby from the amount of the
award made in favor of the respondent, should said re­ceipts be proven to be
authentic.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Makalintal, Zaldivar, Ruiz Castro,
Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Villamor, and
Makasiar, JJ., concur.