Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1963 > April 1963 Decisions > G.R. No. L-12320 April 29, 1963 - VICENTA CORPUS, ET AL. v. JOSE A. V. CORPUS, ET AL. :




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-12320. April 29, 1963.]

ICENTA CORPUS, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JOSE A. V. CORPUS, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

Roman A. Cruz, and Ramon G. Umali, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Ciriaco C. Sayson for Defendants-Appellees.


SYLLABUS


1. MORTGAGE; ABSOLUTE CONVEYANCE DUE TO MORTGAGOR’S TO PAY DEBT; CASE AT BAR. — Plaintiffs’ theory is that through a verbal arrangement the property in question was delivered to the mortgagee so that the latter may administer it and apply the proceeds to the satisfaction of the mortgage debt. Upon the other hand, counsel for the mortgagee swore to having prepared the deed of absolute conveyance, in view of plaintiff’s failure to pay the mortgage debt and thereafter, new titles were issued in the name of the mortgagee, which were replaced later with titles in the name of the defendant Memorial Foundation. Held: The preponderance of evidence favored the defendants. The official transfers and registrations could not have been made unless true copies of deeds of conveyance had been presented and unless the original certificates of tiles had been surrendered by the mortgagors to the Register of Deeds.

2. SETTLEMENT OF ESTATE OF DECEASED PERSONS; RELINQUISHMENT OF CLAIMS AGAINST ESTATE; EFFECT; OF. — Plaintiffs’ cession of rights in favor of the legatees and heirs named in the will cut off whatever claims they may have had to the properties of the estate for distribution.


D E C I S I O N


BENGZON, J.:


The plaintiffs are the heirs of Pio V. Corpus. They seek to recover from the executor of Teodoro R. Yangco and the defendant Memorial Foundation the so-called Hacienda Masbate which admittedly belonged to Pio V. Corpus way back in 1930. They also demand, in this suit filed in Masbate in 1951, full accounting for the produce of said hacienda from the year 1934, in addition to damages amounting to P100,000.00.

In their amended answer, the defendants alleged that, to secure his indebtedness of P231,178.60, Pio V. Corpus 1 executed in 1933 a deed of mortgage in favor of Teodoro R. Yangco; that upon failure of the mortgagor to comply with his obligations under the mortgage — payment of yearly installments — Pio V. Corpus executed some time in 1937, a deed of absolute conveyance in favor of Yangco, who thereby became the sole owner of the land.

It appears that after Yangco died (in April 1939), the land was transferred to the Yangco Memorial Foundations in pursuance of certain provisions of his will. Hence the Foundation is also a defendant.

There were other defenses which will hereafter be mentioned.

The case was duly heard; and in an extensive decision describing and analyzing the conflicting evidence of the parties, the Hon. Pascual Santos, Judge, reached the conclusion that the preponderance favored the defendants. He, therefore, dismissed the complaint and awarded costs to defendants. Hence this appeal by the plaintiffs.

The Hacienda Masbate of more than 900 hectares was acquired by Pio V. Corpus during his marriage with Luz Clemente, who died in January 1930. It consisted of eleven parcels of land, four of which were duly registered under the Torrens system. Herein plaintiffs are the children and grandchildren of the couple, and their legitimate heirs, Pio V. Corpus having died in November 1944.

On October 30, 1933, Pio V. Corpus, and the heirs of Luz Clemente, Vicenta Corpus, Luis Quintana, Arturo Corpus, Amanda Corpus and Roman A. Cruz, executed a mortgage deed of the Hacienda Masbate "to guarantee payment of an indebtedness in the sum of P231,178.60 payable at least P10,000.00 a year at 8% per annum, in favor of the late Don Teodoro R. Yangco; . . . sometime between the death of Luz Clemente in 1930 and 1935; the possession of the properties enumerated in paragraph 4 of the cause of action of plaintiffs’ (Hacienda Masbate) complaint was transferred to Don Teodoro R. Yangco; . . . since the transfer of possession mentioned in the next preceding paragraph, the late Don Teodoro R. Yangco, and after his death, his estate, and thereafter his successor-in-interest have been in possession of said properties; . . . since Don Teodoro R. Yangco took possession of the properties subject of this action, neither he nor his estate, nor his successor-in-interest, have accounted for the income or produce thereof to any, although the plaintiffs have presented formal written demands, dated October 31, 1951, and November 19, 1951, upon the administrators of the Yangco estate; . . . during the World War II practically all important documents, especially those referring to the properties involved in this action in the possession of the deceased Teodoro R. Yangco and Pio V. Corpus were lost and/or destroyed, and during the same period all the records of the Register of Deeds of Masbate pertaining to said properties, including the original certificate of title . . . Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 described in paragraph 4 of plaintiffs’ complaint, were originally registered under Act 496 in the name of the deceased spouses Pio V. Corpus and Luz Clemente but same are now registered in the name of the late Don Teodoro R. Yangco Memorial Foundation by transfer from reconstituted titles issued in the name of the late Don Teodoro R. Yangco . . . ." (Partial Stipulation of Facts, Record on Appeal pp. 49-52).

It is the plaintiffs’ theory that through a verbal arrangement, after the mortgage deed, the Hacienda was delivered to the possession of Teodoro R. Yangco so that the latter may administer it and apply the proceeds to the satisfaction of such mortgage debt.

Two of the plaintiffs testified to the supposed arrangement, but they were not believed by the trial judge, who chose to give credit to the attorney of Teodoro R. Yangco who swore to having prepared the deed of absolute conveyance, in view of the failure of Pio V. Corpus to pay some yearly installments under the mortgage debt. This attorney also swore to the loss of all copies of the documents of sale and to the presentation of the Torrens titles in the name of Pio V. Corpus to the Register of Deeds of Masbate to obtain new titles in the name of Yangco — as in fact, such titles were issued — only to be replaced later with titles in the name of Yangco Memorial Foundation to which they were conveyed in pursuance of the provisions of the will of Teodoro R. Yangco.

Now, considering that such official transfers and registration could not have been made unless true copies of deeds of conveyance had been presented and unless the original certificates of title had been surrendered by Pio V. Corpus in accordance with the contract of transfer to Yangco;

Considering that from 1934 to 1950 no accounting has ever been made by nor demanded 2 from Teodoro R. Yangco or his executor — which should have been made if the arrangement had really been one of antichresis 3;

And considering further that from 1937 Teodoro R. Yangco had been leasing as owner to several persons specific portions of the Hacienda by written contracts executed with the knowledge and participation of one of herein plaintiffs, Luis Quintana;

There seems to be sufficient reasons to sustain the trial judge’s conclusion in appraising the conflicting evidence of the parties.

But we do not seem it necessary to pursue this line of approach to reach a decision of this appeals. There is one point which appear to be decisive.

When Teodoro R. Yangco died in 1939, he left a will, Pio V. Corpus, a nephew, received nothing out of his uncle’s estate unlike his brothers who got big shares; he and his heirs would have participated in the estate if his uncle, Yangco, had left no will. They, therefore, opposed the probate of the will in the proceedings No. 54863 of the Manila court of first instance. They lost there, and also in the Supreme Court. When the project of partition was later filed, they opposed it, contending that the will did not dispose of all Yangco’s estate, and that the undisposed portion should be distributed as if Yangco had died intestate. When their opposition was overruled, they appealed to the Supreme Court. Pending such appeal, the parties agreed to an amicable settlement (October 1947) whereby the oppositors — herein plaintiffs — relinquished all claims against the Estate of Teodoro R. Yangco in the following words:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"AGREEMENT FOR COMPROMISE SETTLEMENT

AND CESSION OF RIGHTS"

For and in consideration of THIRTY FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P35,000.00), Philippine Currency, by way of compromise settlement with the appellants in the above entitled case, to wit, Pedro Martinez Et. Al., which appellants, represented by Attorney Roman Cruz, said appellants do hereby cede, assign, and transfer all their rights, claims, title and interest, which they may or might have in or to the Estate of Teodoro R. Yangco in favor of the legatees and heirs instituted in the Last Will and Testament of the said Don Teodoro R. Yangco as approved by the Court of First Instance of Manila and confirmed by the Supreme Court; . . .

It is admitted that in the above testate proceedings of the Manila court of first instance, the Hacienda Masbate was listed in the inventory as one of the properties of the deceased Yangco (Exhs. 10 and 6), to be distributed among the legatees mentioned in the will — excluding the herein plaintiffs. Wherefore, that cession of rights signed by herein plaintiffs, actually cut off whatever claims they may have had — the rights they now assert — to the Hacienda Masbate which was included among the properties of the estate for distribution among the legatees. This relinquishment of rights and the circumstances thereof could even be considered as conclusive corroboration of the evidence adduced by defendants about the execution of a deed of absolute transfer during the lifetime of Pio V. Corpus of the Hacienda Masbate to Teodoro R. Yangco. Indeed, they never asserted in said intestate any rights to the Hacienda; specifically.

In this view of the controversy, we find it unnecessary to pass on the other points raised by the appellants to challenge other pronouncements of the trial court against their right to recover — regarding prescription of action, for instance.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, JJ., concur.

Padilla, Labrador and Reyes, J.B.L., JJ., took no part.

Endnotes:



1. With herein plaintiffs as heirs of Luz Clemente, his deceased wife.

2. Plaintiffs’ brief does not specify any date. Defendants state; no demands earlier than 1950 (p. 42, their brief).

3. Plaintiff Quintana said, net income was P30,000 to P40,000 a year. A conservative estimate of P35,000 a year would show that the entire debt would have been paid in 10 years. Why no claim for the return until the 17th year? Remember, that Pio V. corpus died only in 1944 and for ten years, while he lived, he asked no accounting for the products of the Hacienda.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






April-1963 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-15699 April 22, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PROCOPIO CADERAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15807 April 22, 1963 - INES SANTOS, ET AL. v. MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF CALOOCAN, RIZAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16357 April 22, 1963 - MAGDALENA ESTATE, INC., ET AL. v. FRANCISCO BANGILAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17324 April 22, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. CLASICO TAJANLAÑGIT

  • G.R. No. L-17610 April 22, 1963 - JESUS R. FRANCO, ET AL. v. MONTE DE PIEDAD AND SAVINGS BANK

  • G.R. No. L-17738 April 22, 1963 - LUPO L. DIÑOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18080 April 22, 1963 - TAN KIM KEE v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18198 April 22, 1963 - LUZ BARRANTA v. INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-18610 April 22, 1963 - ANGEL BERMUDEZ, ET AL. v. MARGARITA FERNANDO

  • G.R. No. L-14853 April 23, 1963 - SANTIAGO LOPEZ, ET AL. v. JUAN MAGALLANES

  • G.R. No. L-15808 April 23, 1963 - FAUSTA AGCANAS, ET AL. v. BRUNO MERCADO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17467 April 23, 1963 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY v. JOSE YULO TOBIAS

  • G.R. No. L-17840 April 23, 1963 - MARIA ELENA ARAULLO v. MONTE DE PIEDAD SAVINGS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-17880 and L-17881 April 23, 1963 - MALAYA WORKERS UNION, ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17908 April 23, 1963 - FLORENCIO MORENO v. HIGINIO MACADAEG

  • G.R. No. L-18206 April 23, 1963 - CIRIACO NOBEL v. VICENTE CABIJE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18263 April 23, 1963 - APOLINARIO DACANAY, ET AL. v. JAVIER PABALAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18371 April 23, 1963 - FIL-HISPANO LABOR UNION, ET AL. v. AGUSTIN P. MONTESA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18587 April 23, 1963 - APOLINARIO VALERIO v. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE & NATURAL RESOURCES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18810 April 23, 1963 - MD TRANSIT & TAXI CO., INC., ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO DE GUZMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18848 April 23, 1963 - ACOJE WORKERS’ UNION v. NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS’ UNION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18957 April 23, 1963 - VILLA-REY TRANSIT, INC. v. ELOY B. BELLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20522 April 23, 1963 - APOLONIO GONZAGA v. CONRADO D. SENO

  • G.R. No. L-16998 April 24, 1963 - DANIEL ROMERO, ET AL. v. PALAWAN MANGANESE MINE, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17820 April 24, 1963 - LAND SETTLEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. GARCIA PLANTATION CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-18969 April 24, 1963 - KAPISANAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MANILA RAILROAD CO., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • A.C. No. 266 April 27, 1963 - PAZ ARELLANO TOLEDO v. JESUS B. TOLEDO

  • G.R. No. L-15731 April 27, 1963 - TAYTAY METHODIST COMMUNITY CHURCH, INC. v. ELADIO M. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17501 April 27, 1963 - MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY v. N. V. J. VAN DORP, LTD., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18117 April 27, 1963 - ROMAN GUERRERO v. JUAN AGUSTIN ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18258 April 27, 1963 - GUILLERMO COMEDA v. E. Q. CAJILOG, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18401 April 27, 1963 - PERFECTO JABALDE v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

  • G.R. No. L-18513 April 27, 1963 - SY HA, ET AL. v. EMILIO L. GALANG

  • G.R. No. L-18563 April 27, 1963 - RADIOWEALTH, INC. v. JOSE LAVIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18815 April 27, 1963 - J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. FEDERICO CADAMPOG

  • G.R. No. L-19343 April 27, 1963 - CRISPULO D. BELMI, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-12320 April 29, 1963 - VICENTA CORPUS, ET AL. v. JOSE A. V. CORPUS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15581 April 29, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MOROS TANJI AMBRAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15927 April 29, 1963 - VICENTE MARTELINO v. MAXIMO ESTRELLA

  • G.R. No. L-16924 April 29, 1963 - ANTONIA A. YEE v. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SCHOOL

  • G.R. No. L-17361 April 29, 1963 - FRANKLIN BAKER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

  • G.R. No. L-17846 April 29, 1963 - EDUARDA DUELLOME v. BONIFACIO GOTICO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18716 April 29, 1963 - CLEMENTE SUMCAD v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18835 April 29, 1963 - GASPAR DUMLAO v. MARCELO T. DOMINGO

  • G.R. No. L-19019 April 29, 1963 - MALAN BROTHERS WATCHMAN AGENCY v. MAGDALENO CONANAN, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 376 April 30, 1963 - JOSEFINA ROYONG v. ARISTON OBLENA

  • G.R. No. L-10963 April 30, 1963 - COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. AMERICAN RUBBER COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-13739 April 30, 1963 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. CARLOS MORAN SISON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14264 April 30, 1963 - RAYMUNDO B. TAN, ET AL. v. MUNICIPALITY OF PAGBILAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14302 April 30, 1963 - JOSE MARGATE v. JULIA RABACAL

  • G.R. No. L-14752 April 30, 1963 - FRANCISCO R. CARIÑO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15639 April 30, 1963 - INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL WORKERS ORGANIZATION v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15698 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ALEJANDRO SOMOZA v. ALICIA S. BANOGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15876 April 30, 1963 - MANUEL R. SOLIVIO v. FRANCISCO ARELLANO

  • G.R. No. L-16307 April 30, 1963 - FEDERICA ABALLE v. FORTUNATO SANTIAGO

  • G.R. No. L-16428 April 30, 1963 - LEALDA ELECTRIC CO., INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16620 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO BUMATAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-16688-90 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PACITA MADRIGAL-GONZALES

  • G.R. No. L-16790 April 30, 1963 - URBANO MAGBOO, ET AL. v. DELFIN BERNARDO

  • G.R. No. L-16880 April 30, 1963 - LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY v. ANTONIO MENENDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16922 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ROSE C. ELLIS v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-17173 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. THEODORE (TED) LEWIN

  • G.R. No. L-17431 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: REMEDIO SAN LUIS DE CASTRO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-17447 April 30, 1963 - GONZALO PUYAT & SONS, INC. v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17527 April 30, 1963 - SUN BROTHERS APPLIANCES, INC. v. DAMASO P. PEREZ

  • G.R. No. L-17791 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE TAN

  • G.R. No. L-17813 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-17916 April 30, 1963 - MAXIMO GOMEZ v. FOOKIEN TIMES COMPANY, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-17928 April 30, 1963 - SERVILLANO DE LA CRUZ, JR., ET AL. v. ASUNCION D. STA. MARIA

  • G.R. No. L-17938 April 30, 1963 - ESPERIDION TOLENTINO v. ADELA ONGSIAKO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17946 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO PRIETO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18081 April 30, 1963 - SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION v. E. SORIANO, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18044 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMBROSIA VALLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18174 April 30, 1963 - FELIX LACSON v. FELINA LOZADA ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18220 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ROBERT MCCULLOCH DICK v. HELEN C. DICK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18270 April 30, 1963 - SAN PABLO OIL FACTORY, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18284 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ANA ISABEL HENRIETTE ANTONIA CONCEPCION GEORGIANA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18332 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ESTANISLAO M. IGNACIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18481 April 30, 1963 - JOSE B. ESCUETA v. CITY MAYOR, ET AL.