ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[ G.R. No. 140855. August 9, 2000]
BACOLOD DELARS REALTY DEV'T CORP. vs. NEGROS GRACE PHARMACY, INC.
FIRST DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 9 2000.
G.R. No. 140855 (Bacolod Delars Realty Development Corporation vs. Negros Grace Pharmacy, Inc.)
The present petition seeks a partial reversal of the consolidated Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP Nos. 47932 and 48080, which affirmed in toto the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City, Branch 42, and denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration, respectively.
The antecedents of this case, as found by the Court of Appeals, are as follows:
The case commenced on July 17, 1997, when Bacolod Delars Realty Development Corporation (Delars, henceforth) lodged a complaint for Unlawful Detainer with the MTCC [Municipal Trial Court in Cities], Branch 1 of Bacolod City against Negros Grace Pharmacy, Incorporated (Negros, henceforth).
In the complaint, Delars stated that it is a corporation duly organized and established under Philippine laws and the owner of a parcel of land with a building, having acquired the same from the De La Rama Development Corporation (De La Rama, henceforth), situated at Luzuriaga-Gatuslao Streets, Bacolod City, embraced in Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-214266, containing an aggregate land area of 1,182 square meters. Negros is a lessee of a portion of said property, occupying an area thereat of 130 square meters. On which it prosecutes its drugstores business.
Negros has been leasing the subject premises for nearly thirty (30) years, dating as far back as when the De La Rama was still the registered owner of the property in question. The lease was on a month-to-month basis.
Prior to July 11, 1997, the monthly rental for the use of the premises by Negros was P15,985.85, plus value added tax (VAT).
On August 28, 1996, De La Rama served notice upon Negros to vacate the leased premises on or before December 31, 1996, as the building would be undergoing renovation. Concomitantly, De La Rama sent all the tenants of their building, contracts of lease covering the period dated January 1, 1996 until December 31, 1996. Not one tenant, however, obliged to the proposed contract of lease. In the meantime, through a letter of January 20, 1997, Negros conveyed its interest to buy the portion it was renting and, still, on May 16, 1997, Negros sent another letter addressed to Ms. Cecilia Hernaez, President of De La Rama, offering a purchase price of the subject property at P11.5 million. Accordingly, later, it came to the knowledge of Negros that De La Rama was no longer the owner of the property, the latter having already exchange the same for shares of stocks in Delars. Thereafter, on June 23, 1997, Delars, represented by Ricky Enriquez, sent a letter to Dr. Manuel Lo, President of Negros, informing the latter that his offer was being considered and that he was given five (5) days to make a reply.
On June 30, 1997, Negros requested for an extension of one (1) week within which to finalize its options with a reminder that, irrespective of the ownership of the property, its offer of P11.5 million as purchase price was still good. Negros tendered a check for P11.5 million.
In a letter dated July 2, 1997, Delars, however, informed Negros that the lease had been terminated, and gave the latter until July 10, 1997 to vacate the leased premises, with a caveat that should Negros refuse to heed the demand, Delars would be charging the occupant the sum of P100,000.00 per month with a ten percent (10%) escalation fee per month thereafter, representing compensation for its loss of use and occupation of the premises. Negros respondent through a letter dated July 3, 1997, expressing that the terms dictated by Delars through Ricky Enriquez, were unfair, unkind, oppressive, and violative of the law. Negros did not vacate their rented space. 1 Rollo , p. 34-36.
On 11 December 1997, the MTCC rendered a decision finding in favor of Delars. The MTCC ordered, among others, the return of the premises to Delars and the payment by Negros of P100,000.00 a month as rent from the time the case was filed until the premises are vacated. The dispositive portion of the MTCC Decision reads:
WHEREFORE, IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOREGOING, judgment is hereby rendered, as follows:
1. Ordering the defendant or any person or persons acting in their behalf, predecessors-in-interest, together with the members of their family to vacate the premises of Dela Rama building located at Luzuriaga-Gatuslao Streets, to return the possession and use of the same to the plaintiff;
2. Ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of P500,000.00 as compensation for the cost of the use and occupation of the building starting the period from July 11, 1997 to December 11, 1997 at the rate of P100,000.00 a month and to pay the same until the premises is vacated;
3. Ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of P20,000.00 as attorney's fee;
4. Ordering the defendant to pay the plaintiff the sum of P3,000.00 as litigation expenses/costs.
The counterclaim of the defendant being merely a product of the filing of the plaintiff's complaint beside [sic] the total amount claim [sic] was in excess of the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court, is hereby Dismissed. (Sec. 7, Rule 6, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) 2 Id., at 37.
Negros appealed to the Regional Trial Court of Bacolod City, Branch 42. In its Decision, dated 21 May 1998, the RTC affirmed in part the decision of the MTCC with the modification, among others that the monthly rental adjudged by the MTCC of P100,000.00 per month was reduced to only P15,985.85, representing the rent paid by Negros to Delars prior to the filing of the case. The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the decision appealed from is rendered by Branch 1 of Bacolod City on December 11, 1997 is AFFIRMED in part, with the modification that the reasonable compensation for the use and occupation of the leased premises from July 11, 1997 to December 11, 1997 shall only be in the sum of Seventy Nine Thousand [sic] Nine Hundred Twenty Nine Pesos and 85/100 (P79,929.85) at the rate of P15,985.85 per month corresponding to the amount of monthly rentals prior to July 11, 1997 plus the legal interest thereon computed from the filing of the complaint in Civil Case No. 23777, until the lot and building are vacated by the defendant-appellant.
And - finally, the attorney's fees awarded to the plaintiff-appellee in the appealed decision should be, as it is hereby, deleted.
With costs against defendant-appellants.
SO ORDERED. 3 Id., at 33-34.
Both Delars and Negros appealed to the Court of Appeals. In its consolidated Decision, dated 12 August 1999, the CA affirmed in toto the decision of the RTC. Delars filed a "Motion for Partial Reconsideration" claiming that the award of P15,985.85 as monthly rental is not reasonable and prayed that the same be increased. In its Resolution, dated 19, November 1999, the CA denied the said motion.
Hence, the present petition, the only issue being proper and equitable amount of rental that should be paid by Negros to Delars. Delars prays that it be allowed to recover from Negros the rent it has fixed for the premises, P100,000.00 per month, and, in the event that the Court finds the same to be excessive, to adjust the same to a reasonable amount in view of Negros's own evidence that the fair rental value for the leased premises is P25,000.00 per month as borne by a study conducted by an independent appraiser, Asian Appraisal.
On the other hand, Negros contends that the sum of P100,000.00 sought by petitioner as back rental is exorbitant in view of the fact that in ejectment cases, only the fair rental value of the premises van be recovered by the lessor. Negros insists that the award of the trial court and the Court of Appeals of P15,985.85 per month as fair rental value is the appropriate amount.
The petition has no merit.
What constitutes reasonable rent over the subject premises is a question of fact, and factual findings of the Court of Appeals are generally binding upon this Court. In this case, the Court finds no reason to depart from the finding of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed that of the RTC, regarding the fair rental value of the property. The Court of Appeals held:
This Court, However, scoured the records, but failed to see such strong, compelling evidence to justify the award of P100,000.00 as reasonable compensation for the leased premises.
Under the circumstances, we, therefore, agree with the posture taken by the RTC that the monetary award was virtually bereft of evidentiary underpinnings. 4 Id., at 44.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolved to DENY the petition.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
