ChanRobles Virtual law Library
[G.R. No. 135043.
TOWNE & CITY DEV'T. vs . VOLUNTAD
SPECIAL SECOND DIVISION
Gentlemen:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this
Court dated
G.R. No. 135043 (Towne and City Development Corporation vs. Guillermo Voluntad.)
On
WHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED. Costs against the petitioner.
The dispositive portion of the decision of the Court of Appeals reads:
ACCORDINGLY, finding no reversible error in the decision appealed
from, dated
While the trial court's decision dated
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered, as follows:
1.������ Ordering defendant to pay plaintiff the total sum of P715, 228.50 representing defendant's
unpaid balance owing in favor of plaintiff, with 3% interest from the time of
filing of the complaint until the full amount is satisfied;
2.������ Ordering the plaintiff to vacate the house occupied by him belonging to defendant;
3.������ No pronouncement as to cost and attorney's fees.
On
On
Art. 2209 of the Civil Code provides:
Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six percent per annum.
Respondents were not able to establish their claim to the payment
of a three percent (3%) monthly interest. While the Complaint a quo prayed for
the payment of "P971,959.99 with interest at 3% from the date the same became
due,
[1]
cralaw
and the subject Motion for Clarification now claims that a three percent (3%)
monthly interest for unpaid obligations was agreed upon by the parties, respondents
were not able to present the contract, nor prove the stipulation as to the
payment of monthly interest in case of delay in payments. In civil cases, the
burden of proof to be established by preponderance of evidence is on the
plaintiff who is the party asserting the affirmative
of an issue.
[2]
cralaw
As the party claiming the said relief, private respondents had the burden of
proving the existence of the same. Having failed to do so, they cannot now
claim the three percent (3%) monthly interest payments.
However, inasmuch as the obligation on the part of the petitioner has been determined with finality by the Court, private respondents are entitled to the payment of the legal interest of six percent (6%) of the amount due, computed on a yearly basis, in accordance with Art. 2209 of the Civil Code. Further, when the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. [3] cralaw
The Court is clothed with ample authority to review matters rnotu
proprio
, if it finds that their
consideration is necessary in arriving at a just decision of the case. WHEREFORE, the dispositive portion of
the decision dated
WHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED IN PART. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION insofar as the rate of interest, which is hereby fixed at six percent (6%) per annum to be computed from the decision of the court a quo, dated 29 December 1994. A TWELVE PERCENT (12%) interest, in lieu of SIX PERCENT (6%), shall be imposed on such amount upon finality of this decision until the payment thereof. Costs against the petitioner.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.)
LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] cralaw RTC Records, p. 3.
[2] cralaw C&S Fishfarm Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122720, 16 December 2002, 394 SCRA 82, 89.
[3] cralaw Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 97412, 12 July 1994, 234 SCRA 78, 97.
HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
QUICK SEARCH
