ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 151252.March 6, 2002]
PNB, et al. vs. BASCUG
THIRD DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated MAR 6 2002 .
G.R. No. 151252(Philippine National Bank, et al. vs. Laurentino D. Bascug.)
Petitioner assails the resolution of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the regional trial court in an action for specific performance filed by private respondent against petitioner declaring that the payment of the P62,000.00 constituting 20% of the agreed valuation of the subject parcel of land, and the acceptance by the petitioner bank of said amount with corresponding issuance of a receipt not only perfected the contract of sale but also rendered it party executed.
The present controversy sprung from a written proposal to sell made by the assistant vice president and manager of the Victorias Branch of petitioner bank addressed to a certain Salvacion Ditching Vda. de Triunfo, private respondent'smother-in-law informing her that the parcel of lot which she had previously ownedbut was which was later foreclosed by petitioner bank was being offered for sale, and asking if Triunfo was interested in repurchasing the same.As a result, private respondent offered to repurchase said property and on July 22, 1987, private respondent paid petitioner bank the amount of P62,000.00 which constitutes 20% of the agreed valuation of the subject property assessed at P313,000.00.In turn, petitioner's manager assured respondent that the pertinent papers will be forwarded to the sales office for approval.
However, said papers were never forwarded to petitioner's head office.Private respondent never having been informed of this fact, felt assured that the papers were being processed.
Apparently, instead of forwarding the papers, petitioner's Victorias branch conducted another appraisal but failed to inform private respondent of this fact or of the fact that the previously agreed valuation was only good for one year.Neither did petitioner inform private respondent about the amended or latest valuation.
Finally, on April 11, 1991, respondent caused to be brought to petitioner's bank a Bank of the Philippine Islands cashier's check for P100,000.00 to be applied as additional payment for the subject property but petitioner bank refused to accept the same.Hence, the action for specific performance.
The trial court decided in favor of private respondent.Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed with modification by deleting the award of attorney's fees.Thus, the instant petition.
Initially, the court notes that the instant petition is not accompanied by the required duplicate original or certified true copy of the assailed resolution dated December 14, 2001 denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration in violation of Rule 45, Section 4 in relation to Rule 56, Section 5 of the Rules of Court.Only a photocopy of said resolution is annexed to the petition.This lapse, standing alone, is sufficient to cause outright dismissal of the petition.
But over and above this technical flaw is the fact that the Court finds no error committed by the two lower courts in rendering their decisions.
The disputed proposal for the sale of the property to Triunfo is of the following tenor:
We are now in the process of selling the property we have foreclosed, to an offeror.The property is particularly described as lot no. 3 with an area of 4,347 square meters which, you are present occupying.
Unless you are also interested in purchasing back the property, we hereby give you notice to vacate the premises within fifteen (15) days from your receipt hereof.However, if you are interested to repurchase the same, our latest valuation of the lot is P313,000.00, including the improvements thereon.
We are looking forward for your preferential attention on this matter and would be very glad to discuss the subject with you soonest.
The elements of a valid contract of sale under Article 1458 of the Civil code are as follows: a) consent or meeting of the minds; b) determinate subject matter; and c) price certain in money or its equivalent.The subject matter was properly identified - the property mortgaged by Salvacion Vda. de Triunfo with petitioner bank; the consideration of P313,000.00 which was already agreed as the price or assessed value of the property and consent.In the case at bar, there is no better manifestation of consent than the payment and acceptance of the P62,000.00 made by both parties.This is further bolstered by the testimony of petitioner's witness who testified that as a matter of procedure, the bank required a 20% downpayment on a negotiated sale.The sum of P62,000.00 is 20% of the purchase price.As provided in Article 1475 of the Civil Code, a contract of sale is perfected at the moment there is a meeting of minds upon the thing -Lot No. 3, with TCT No. T-74159 - which is the object of the contract and upon the price of P313,000.00.From that moment, both parties may reciprocally demand performance.It is to be noted that petitioner's Victorias officials never intimated or suggested that they are not authorized to negotiate and enter into the sale, or that said contract would need the approval of its head office.
WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.
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
