Trabajo académico expediente laboral: desnaturalización de contrato y expediente civil: obligación de dar suma de dinero

Abstract

La demanda en un primer momento fue declarado inadmisible, pero luego de subsanar las observaciones fue admitida en vía procedimental abreviado, posteriormente se emplazó al demandado quien contestó la demanda de manera negativa, seguidamente se emitió el auto de saneamiento procesal por existir una relación jurídica válida asimismo se fijaron los puntos controvertidos para delimitar la Litis, también se admitieron los medios probatorios ofrecidas por las partes a excepción de la exhibición sobre los recibos de pago de otro periodo que debía exhibir la parte demandante, luego se llevó a cabo la audiencia de pruebas para actuar la declaración de parte del demando y finalmente se emitió la sentencia declarando fundada la demanda a favor del demandante, por tal motivo el demandado dentro del plazo legal interpuso recurso impugnatorio de apelación, se emitió la sentencia de vista en la que confirma la Resolución que declaró fundada en primera instancia, siendo así que dentro del plazo establecido por Ley, el demandado interpuso el recurso extraordinario de casación, sin embargo no adjuntó el pago de la tasa judicial por concepto de casación, es así que se le concedió tres días para acompañar la referida tasa, no obstante pese a haber sido debidamente notificado y haber transcurrido en exceso el plazo concedido para ello, el demando no cumplió, razón por la cual se rechazó el recurso de casación y se le condenó a una multa de 10 URP, la cual debía pagar dentro de los tres días de notificada la resolución.

The present case, is a process referring to the obligation to give sum of money, filed by representing (four brothers) against a natural person, requesting payment of the sum of S /. 148,200.00 and $.154, 200.00 after the breach of payment by lease contract and clauses established by both parties. The demand at first was declared inadmissible, but after correcting the observations was admitted in abbreviated procedural way, later it was summoned to the defendant who answered the demand in a negative way, then the procedural sanitation order was issued because there was a valid legal relationship the controversial points were also established to delimit the Litis, the evidential means offered by the parties were also admitted, with the exception of the exhibition on the payment receipts of another period that the plaintiff was to exhibit, then the evidence hearing was carried out to act on the declaration of the defendant and finally the judgment was issued, stating the plaintiff's claim in favor of the plaintiff, for this reason the defendant filed a writ of appeal within the statutory period of appeal, the judgment verifying the Resolution was issued which he declared founded in the first instance, being that Within the period established by law, the defendant filed the extraordinary appeal, however, he did not attach the payment of the judicial fee for the cassation, so he was granted three days to accompany the aforementioned rate, despite having Once the deadline for this has been duly notified and the time allowed for it has elapsed, the claim was not complied with, which is why the appeal was rejected and he was sentenced to a fine of 10 URP, which he had to pay within three days of notified the resolution.