Supreme Court Decisions, Valenzuela vs. Bakani - Justice Paras.pdf · Rare Periodicals

Supreme Court Decisions, Valenzuela vs. Bakani - Justice Paras.pdf

Media

Part of The Lawyers Journal

extracted text: SUPREME COURT DECISIONS Jose 1'. Valenzitela, etc., Plai11f·if!.Apµcl/m1.t, v,.,-. Jose 1. Bakani, Defendant·Appellee G. R. No. 'L·4689, A1lg11st 31, 1953. CIVIL CODE; CONSIGNATION BY THE OBLIGOR OF THI:: THING DUE.- J sold to B eight parcels of land for the sum of f13,490 but reserving to himself (J) the right to rcpurch~sc. them within seven years for the same consideration and to remain in the land as Ieasec. Later on J and B executed another agreement extending the period of repurchase to ten years and reducing the annual rental. J then transferred his rights over the land to A binding himself at the same time to obtain the cancellation of the sale in favor of B. J through his altornc~' Wl'Otc a letter to B offering the sum of !'l~,490 as payment of repurchase price and warned that if no answer was received in ten days B would be considered as having refused to receive said payment and to reeonvey the property in which case J would institute the prnper action. This was followed by another letter stating that if there is no answer, B rejected the payment offered and refused to rcconvcy the pro)Jerty to J. Whereupon J instituted an action ~01111)e\\ini; B to execute the proper deed of resale. In the complamt 'it is alleged that J was depositing with the Clerk of Coul't the sum of 1'15,372.50 to cover the amount of the repurchase price and the un1Jaid rentals. The lower .court ruled that there was no valid consigration on the ground that B did not give previous notice of the judicial consignation in conformity with Article 1177 of the old Code. It was argued by the appellant on the other hand, that the service of the summons and a copy of the complaint UJJO!l the creditor constitute a sufficient notice. HELD: The latter's contention is correct. In the case of Alejandro Andres, ct al. vs. Court of Appeals, ct al., December 29, 1949, 47 O.G. 2876, tl1is Court made t-he following applicable pronom1ccment: "The petitionel'S also question the validity and regularity of the consignation in court made by respondents of the sum of r5,500.00. Suffice it to say on this point that <lfter the i·ejection by the )letitioner of the valid tender made by the respondents, the latter filed the corresponding complaint in court accompanying the filing of the suit with the consignation of the money in court and alleging and mentioning said consignation in the complaint. This was sufficient notice to the petitioners of the consignation so that if they wanted to receive that money from the Pourt in return for a reconveyance of the property in question, they could have done so." Again, in Duftgao, et al. v. Roque, ct al., G. H. Nos. L-4140 and L-4141, decided on December 29, 1951, this Court held: "How the second notice is to be effected is not specified. The usual method is, when the consignation is followed by the filing of a suit, thmugh service to the defendant of the summons accompanied by a copy of the complaint." The consignation being thus valid, Valenzuela was released from any further obligation i·cgarding the re)lurchase price, and it consequently became the duty of the appellee to eXecutc the necessary deed of reconveyancc in favor of Valenzuela, now subrogated by Florencio H. Araullo. Francisco M. Ramos fo1· intervenor-appellant Valeriano Silva for plaintiff-appellant Ed. Gutierrez David for defendant-appellee DECISION PAHAS, C. J.: On May G, Hl38, Jose T. Valenzuela sold to Jose I. Bakani, for the sum of Pl3,490.00 eight parcels of land situated in the nrnnicipalities of Guagua and Lubao, province of Pampanga, and cove1·ed by original certificates of title Nos. 21839, 21840, 21848 and 21850 of the Registry of Deeds of Pampanga, Valenzuela res11rving to himself the i·ight to repurchase within seven years for the same consideration, and to remain on the land as lessee at an annual rental of Pl,100.00 beginning May 1939. On May 22, 1943, Valenzuela and Bakani executed anothc1· agreement extending the period of l'CJJU1·chase to ten years from May 16, 1943, and reducing the annual rental to P867.00. On l''ebruary 16, 1944, Valenzuela transferred his rights to the land to Florencio H. Arnullo, binding Jiimself at the same time to obtain the cancellation of the sale in favor of Bakani. On Mat'ch 3, 1944, Valenzuela, thru Atty. Valeriano Silva, addressed a letter to Bakani, offering the sum of Pl3,490.00 as payment of the repurchase price, and warning that if no answer was received in ten days, Bakani would be considered as having refused to receive said payment and to reconvey the property, in which case Valenzuela would institute the proper action. This was followed by another letter, . dated March 21, 1944, sent to Bakani by Valenzuela through Atty. Silva, calling attention to the pre· vious letter and admonishing that if no answer was received from Bakani in five days, the corresponding action would be filed. In hi:o answer <lated March 24, 1944, Ba.kani rejected the payment offered and refused to reconvey the property to Valenzuela. Whereupon, on March 31, 1944, Valenzuela instituted the present action in the Coul't of First Instance of Pampanga, to compel Bakani to execute the proper deed of resale. In paragraph 7 of the complaint, it is alleged that the plaintiff was depositing with the clerk of court the sum of r15,372.50 to cover the amount of the repurchase price (rl3,490.00), the unpaid rentals up to March, 1944. (fl,882.50), and tl1c expenses in connection with the contract (f200.00 l, and that the said amount was at the disposal of Bakani. Subsequently Florencio H. Araullo, who had already acquired the rights of Valenzuela, wa:s allowed to intervene in the case. In his decision dated May 10, 1950, the trial judge held that there was no valid consignation on the part of Valenzuela, and accordingly gave the following judgment: "WHEREOF, as prayed for by the intervenor, t he defendant is hereby ordered to execute a deed of resale in favor of the intervenor FLORENCIO H. ARA ULLO over the eight parcels of land in question and now described in, and recorded unde1· Transfer Certificates of Title Nos. 74, 75, 76 and 77 of the Registry of Deeds of Pampanga, upon 1myment by said intervenor to the defendant of the sum of THIRTEEN THOUSAND FOUH HUNDRED NINETY (1'13,490.00) PESOS, in actual currency; and the intervenor is ordered to pay the defendant the sum of 1"960.00 as part of the rentals due on May 16, 1943; plus the yearly rentals of r867.00 from May 15, 1944' until the repurchase of the properties be accomplished, with legal interests thereon from their respective dates of mtaurlty (May 15 of every year) until fully paid, without pronouncement as to costs." The plaintiff Jose T. Valenzuela and the intervenor Florencio H. Araullo have appealed. After the death of Valenzuela he was in due time substituted by the administratrix of his estate, Feliza Malicsi Vda. de Valenzuela. As pointed out in thC' appealed decision, the dcfendant-·appellee, Jose I. Bakani, contended that the amount offered and consigned in court by the plaintiff-appellant was not the price of the sale with pacto de retffo, that the consignation was not in accordance with law, a11d that by virtue of the second agreement of May 22, 1943, the origi1ial contract of sale with right of 1·epurclmse was converted into an absolute deed. The first and second points were overruled by the trial judge. As to the first, it was correctly ruled that the Japanese military notes were legal tender in the Philippines during the Japanese occupati~n. As to the third, the agreement of May 22, 1943, expressly stipulated that "se extienda el plaza de! rcferido retracto a diez (10) aiios contados desde el May 16, 1943." The important issue that arises, as the appellants so emphasize, is whether or not the trial court erred in holding that there was no valid consignation. Its ruling was based on the JH'emise that Valenzuela did not give previous notice of the judicial consignation in conformity with article 1177 of the old Civil Code prnviding that, "In order that thC'. consignation of the thing due may release the oblig-d.tor, previous notice thereof must be given to the 11ersons interested in the performa11cc of the obligation." Upon the other hand, it is argued for the appellants that the service of the summon!< and copy of the complaint upon the iippellee constituted sufficient notice. The latter's contention is correct. In the ease of ;;~~~i~dJoo~~<~r~~7~,t t~:is "~·ot~~u:~~a~~ ~::cf:11~~\~~n~1·~,~~~ce~i~i:\1;~~ nouncemcnt: "The 1ictitioners also question the validity and regularity of the consignation i11 court made by respondents of the sum Feb1uary 28, 1954 THE LAWYEHS JOURNAL 67 of P5,500.00. Suffice il lo say on lhis point that afteF the rejec- !I JACINTO R. BOHOL, PETITIONER VS. MAURO ROSARIO, AS PROVINCIAL AUDITOR 01'' S1lMAR, AND JOSE C. ORTEZA, 1lS PROVINCIAL TREASURER OF SAMAR, RESPONV£'NTS, G, R. NO. L-5057, JULY 31, 1953. tion by the petitioners of the valid tender made by the respondents, the latter filed the concsponding complaint in court accompanyini' the filing of the suit with the consignation of the money in court and alleging and mentioning said consignation in the complaint. Tl1is was sufficient notice to the petitioners of the consignation so that if they wanted to receive that money from the court 1 . SALARY LAW; OPINION OF THE SECRETARY OF FINANCE AS TO ITS APPLICATION AND ENFORCEMENT.The claim that the position of secretary to the provincial governor of a first class A 11rovince comes within Grades 1-8, inclusiw, ii; at best highly controversi&\. But 'gra.nting again, for \he purpose of this case, that by a very liberal interpretation petitfoner could qualify under any of these grades as well as Grades 12 to 15, the opinion of the Secretary of Finance, nevertheless, should be entitled to respect and preference in case of overlapping of grades and their defii1itions and of divergence of views, this official being the instrumentality charged with supervising thl'! allocation of salaries in local governments. He is to judge the kind and degree of ability, experience. training and other circumstances needed to discharge the duties of each position. in return for a reconvcyance of the property in question, they could have done so." Again, in Duiigao ,et al. v. Hoque, et. al., G. R. Nos. L-4140 and L-4141, decided on December 29, Ul51, this Court held: "How the second 11otice is to be effected is 11ot specified. The usual method is, when the consignation is followed by the filing of a suit, through service to the defendant of the summons accompanied by a copy of the complaint." The consignation being thus valid, Valenz.uela was released from any futther obligation regarding the repurchase price, and it consequently became the duty of the appellee to execute the necessary deed of reconveyance in favor of Valenzuela, now subrogatcd by Florencio H. Araullo. It is noteworthy that the amount deposited in court covered not only the repurchase price but also the rentals due up to the date of the consignation, plus the necessary expenses. Wherefore, the appealed judgment. is reversed and the appellee, J ose I. Bakani, is hereby ordered to execute, within ilinety days from the finality of this decision, the proper deed of reconveyance covering the properties herein im'oived, in favor of Florencio H. Araullo. So ordered without prnnouncement as to costs. Bengzo1i, 1'ua~wn, Montemayor, R eyes, J1tyo, Baitti:;ia. Anyclo, and Labrador, JJ, concur. PABLO, M., disidente: 2. ID: UNIF'OHMITY IN TH E EMOLUMENTS OF OFFICEHS.-It is a manifest policy of Congress that there be a central authority to establish uniformity in tl1e emoluments of office rs anll employees of equal ranks in the numerous provinces and other lo('a] entities. Determinatfon of the rates of compensation of ::;:ich officers and employees cannot be left to the will and discretion of each p1·ovincial board or city _or mur.icipal council if there is to be "standardization of salaries," "equal distribution uf funds for salary expenses among the different provinci9l offices," or security of "the financial solvency and stability of the pl'ovinYo opi110 que la decision <lei Juzga<lo de Primera Instancia 3. <lebe confirmarse, y no ordenar al demandado Bakani a oturgar la escritura de reventa sin rccibir 1iada, considerando buena y legitices,'' as provided by Executive Order No. 167, series of 1938. CONSTITUTION; LEGITIMATE EXERCISE OF THE POWER OF SUPERVISION VES'rED IN THE PRESIDENT.Classification through the President of government positions is a legislative prerogative, and the Prcsidl'!nt's designation b~· l'xecHtive order of his chief financial officer to see that the classification and the Sabixy Law are observed by local governments, is a legitimate exercii;e of the power of supervision vested in thP Chief Executive by Section 10(1), Art icle VII, of the Co11stitutim1. ' ma la consignacion verificada por Valenzuela en 31 de marzo de 1944 al presentar la demanda, L~ escriturn otorgada por las partes en G de mayo de 1938, decia que la recompra seria en la suma de P13,490.00 pesos filipinos, y no en papel moneda japonesa; al tiempo de otorgarse la escritura, a nadie se 0 le ocurria que vendrian los japoneses a ocupar las Islas; por lo tanto, cl demandado Bakani tiene derecho a exigi 1· que la recompra se haga con moneda filipina, y no con otra, de acuerdo con el articulo 1090 de\ Godigo Civil. En la escritura otorgada en 22 de mayo de 1!143 (Exh. R) no se est.ipulo sobre el precio de la l'ecompra, ni en su cantidad, ni en su calidad. El parrafo que enmendo la primera cscritu ra dice asi : "Que yo el VENDEDOR Y COMPHADOR A RETRO convenimos por el presente en que: C l.o) SE EXTIENDA EL PLAZO DEL REFERIDO RETRACTO A DIEZ (10) Ai\l"OS CONT ADOS DESDE EL MA YO 16, 1943; <2.o) SE HEDUZCA EL PAGO DEL CANON A P867.00 ANUAL J::N VEZ DE Pl,100.00; <3.o) P.ARA EL CASO DE QUE DENTRO DEL REFERIDO PLAZO DICHO VENDEDOR A RETRO NO P UDIERA RETRAER AUN LAS REFERIDAS FINCAS LA EXPRESA DA VE NTA A RETRO ADQUIRIRA BL CARACTER DE ABSOLUTA E JRREVOCA BLEMENTE CONSUMADA." No hubo novacion en cuan a la calidad <lei precio de recompra; solamente bubo novacion en cuanto al plazo de! rctracto. Puesto que la cantidad consignada no era la moneda con\'enida -pesos filipinos, sino papel moneda japonesa, - la consignacion entonces no es buena, no sc ha hecho de acuer<lo con la ley. PADILLA, J., dissenting: 1 dissent from the pronouncement that the Japanese military or war notes were legal tender and that tlie consignation of the repurchase price and stipulated annual rentals was valid, for the same reasons stated in my dissent in La Orden de P. Bencdictinos vs. Philippine Trust Company, 47 Off. Gaz. 28~4, 2897. That part of the judgment appealed from requiring the vendor's assignee to pay in the present currency the redemption price of the parcels of land sold under a pacto de ?"etro, together with the annual rentals due and unpaid, should be affirmed. Jrtcinto Bohol /o-r UJ!l1ell1rnt Snl. Grn. Pl'mp~yo Dia; and Solicitor Emiliu LU'11wntad for rc:;pundentu. DE C ISIO N TllA,ilON J., This was a proceeding for mandamus instituted iu the Court of First Instance of Samar against Mauro Rosario, as provinciul auditor, and Jose C. Orteza, a.s provincial treaSul'er, both of that JH"O\·ince. By order of the court the petition was amended by including the Secretary of Finance as pa.rty respondent. Upon tria! of th<' case, the application was denied, and the petitioner appealed. Petitioner Jacinto R. Rohol is Secretary tu the Provinci ~J Governor of S&mar. On July 1!J, 1!150, his sulary was raised from P3,120 to P3,600 a year "as an except ion al case under Section 256 of the Revised Administrative Code," and on July 20, the raise was approved by the provincial board by appropriate resolution. But the Secretary of Finance, acting on the annua.l budget of the province, disapproved the petitioner's promotion with this comment: "The standard rate of salary fixed by this Department for same position in a first class A province like Sanmr is P2,760 per annum. Howcn:r, n!! it appea.rs that the incumbent of t-his position is ali·eady receiving P3,120 per annum, this rate may be reduced to P2,7GU per annum, ouly upon vacancy of the position." On account of this disapproval, the provincial auditor refused to pass in audit, and the provincial treasurer to pay, the petitioner's voucher on the differential between the old and the new rates of compensation corresponding to the second half of July. Commonwealth Act No. 78, approved October 26, l!l3G, transfrrred to the Secretary of Finance the power and administrative supervision theretofore exercised by the Secretary of Intuior over the assessment of real property, appropriatiOn, and other financial affairs of provincial, municipal and city governments, and ovc1 · the offices of provincial, municipal and city treasurers and pro\•incial and city assessors. In pursuance of this Act'., Executive Order No. 167, series of 1938, wa.s promulgated designating "the Secretary of Finance as the agency of the National Govt:rnment for the supervi66 THE LAWYERS JOUHNAL February 28, 1954
Date: 1954
Rights