ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 135495.
GENARO CORDIAL vs. DAVID MIRANDA
THIRD DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court
dated
G.R No. 135495 (Genaro Cordial vs. David Miranda.)
Respondent seeks reconsideration
of the
In his Motion for Reconsideration, he contends that privity of contract between him and petitioner was never established; that there is no evidence of the partial execution of the contract; and that petitioner's testimonial evidence was contrary to the ordinary course of events.
Respondent's contentions are mere reiterations of the arguments that were already addressed in the Decision. The Court relied on petitioner's testimony, which was corroborated by Cecilia Buelva and given credence by the trial court. We reiterate our ruling that "the CA did not show any cogent justification for overruling the assessment of the trial court, which had had firsthand opportunity to observe all the witnesses during the trial." (Decision, p. 15; rollo, p. 117.)
In a "Motion To Clarify And/Or To Fix The Reckoning Period Of Computation Of Interest," petitioner prays that the reckoning period for the computation of the 12% interest on the principal obligation be fixed. at the filing of the complaint.
In Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. CA (234 SCRA 78, July 12, 1994, per Vitug, J.), the Court laid down the following pertinent rules with respect to the computation of legal interest:
"xxx����� xxx������ xxx"
2. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of money, is breached, an interest on the amount of damages awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. No interest, however, shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand can be established with reasonable certainty. Accordingly, where the demand is established with reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin, to run from the time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. 1169, Civil Code) but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the time the demand is made, the interest shall begin to run only from the date the judgment of the court is made (at which time quantification of damages may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained). The actual base for the computation of legal interest shall, in any case, be on the amount finally adjudged.
3. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest, whether the case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, above, shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction, this interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a forbearance of credit."
Since the contract in this case is not a loan or forbearance of money, it follows that the proper rate of legal interest is six percent (6%) per annum of the principal obligation, computed from the time of the filing of the Complaint before the RTC. Such interest shall continue to run until the finality of this Decision. When this Decisions becomes final, the interest rate shall increase to twelve percent (12%) per annum until its satisfaction. (See Tropical Homes v. CA, 272 SCRA 428, May 14, 1997).
Accordingly, the Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED for lack of merit and the Motion To Clarify And/Or To Fix The Reckoning Period Of Computation Of Interest is NOTED. This DENIAL is FINAL. No further pleadings will be entertained in this case.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON
Clerk of Court
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH