Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1908 > March 1908 Decisions > G.R. No. L-4167 March 21, 1908 - RAFAELA SALMO v. LUISA ICAZA

010 Phil 485:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-4167. March 21, 1908. ]

RAFAELA SALMO, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LUISA ICAZA, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Nicolas Segundo, for Appellants.

Irineo Javier, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. EVIDENCE; REVERSAL. — Held, That upon the evidence of record, as summarized in the opinion the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and judgment entered in favor the defendants.

2. APPEAL FROM JUSTICE’S COURT; TRIAL "DE NOVO." — Since a trial on appeal from the court of a justice of the peace is always de novo, it is the duty of the trial judge to make his own findings of fact and to render new decision upon the records of the proceedings in his own court.

3. ID.; ID.; JUDGMENT. — A judgment merely affirming the judgment of a justice of the peace would not appear to be formulated in consonance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.

4. APPEAL; ACT No. 1627; JURISDICTION OF SUPREME COURT. — Act No. 1627 does not deprive this court of jurisdiction on appeal in cases wherein the appeal had been perfected prior to July 1, 1907, when it went into effect.


D E C I S I O N


CARSON, J. :


This is an action to recover the possession of two small tracts of land, instituted originally in the court of a justice of the peace, with Macario Icaza as defendant. Icaza having died during the course of the proceedings in the Court of First Instance, his children and heirs were substituted, without the objection, as defendants in his stead. The trial judge being of opinion that "the evidence of the plaintiff was more logical, acceptance, probable, and worthy of the credit than that of the defendants" rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff and affirmed the judgment of the justice of the peace.

The decision does not contain a satisfactory finding of facts, unless the facts found by the justice of the peace can be regarded as adopted by the judge of the Court of First Instance, and, even in that case, an examination of the decision of the justice of the peace does not furnish much material assistance in reviewing the proceedings in the Court of First Instance. In this connection it may be well to indicate that since the trial on appeal from the court of the justice of the peace is always de novo, it is the duty of the trial judge to make his own findings of fact and to render a new decision upon the record of the proceedings in this court so that a judgment merely affirming the judgment of a justice of the peace would not appear to be formulated in consonance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The plaintiff alleged that in the year 1893 she was the owner of the land in question; that in that year she gave possession of this land to the original defendant in this action, Macario Icaza, to be held by him until she paid him a certain debt; that 1899 she paid this debt by delivering to him two carabaos; and that since that time he has unlawfully retained the land and refused to return possession thereof to its lawful owner.

The defendant denied that he ever received the land or held possession thereof as security for a debt, and alleged that his wife, one Paula Palafox, bought the land of the plaintiff, and that he had gained possession of the land through and from her.

In support of his allegations he introduced a private document purporting to be a contract of purchase and sale whereby the plaintiff on the 14th of January, 1893, sold one of the tracts of land in question to Paula Palafox for 48 pesos. This document bears the signatures of the plaintiff and her husband and those of five witnesses. The document sets out that the signature of the plaintiff and her husband were attached by a third person at their request, they adding crosses to evidence their conformity. The witnesses to this documents were called and clearly and satisfactorily established its execution, notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff and her husband went on the stand and swore that neither she nor he husband had ever signed such a document or authorized any other person to sign for them.

In support of defendants’ allegation as to the purchase of the second tract of land in question, the testimony of three witnesses was introduced to prove that a similar document had been executed by plaintiff and her husband in favor of Paula Palafox which they had signed as witnesses, but which could not be produced at the trial because it had been burned in the house of the justice of the peace to whom it had been sent for certification. Plaintiff also denied having signed this document, but the testimony of record seems to establish its contents and execution, not perhaps with the same degree of certainty as in the case of the document actually produced, but with sufficient certainty to raise a strong probability in its favor.

The plaintiff, upon whom rested the burden of proof, offered three witnesses in support of her allegation. By these witnesses plaintiff undertook to prove that, without any agreement in writing, she gave the original defendant possession of her land as security for a debt, which she later paid by delivering to him two carabaos worth considerable more than the amount of the debt. The testimony of these witnesses is conflicting and uncertain except as to the fact that plaintiff in or about the year 1899 delivered two carabaos to Macario Icaza. None of them knew anything definite as to the nature or origin of the debt in payment of which it was said the carabaos had been delivered, except what they had heard from the plaintiff herself. It may be that the carabaos were in fact delivered by the plaintiff to Macario Icaza, deceased, in the year 1899, but the mere fact that they were so delivered does not in itself tend to prove that the sale of the land in question, eight years prior thereto, was not a genuine sale as set out in the documents offered in evidence by the defendants.

We do not think that the vague, uncertain, and indefinite statement of these witnesses as to the terms and conditions under which the land in question came into the possession of the defendant, fourteen years before the date when their testimony was given, can prevail against the documentary proof offered by the defendants.

Plaintiff’s counsel contends that the documents introduced by the defendant, not being public writings as defined in section 299 of the Code of Civil Procedure, were not admissible in evidence. It is true that these documents were not public writings but there is no general provision of law which forbids the introduction in evidence of private documents when the execution and genuineness of such documents had been established by competent evidence as in this case; indeed, no evidence of the contends of such writings other than the writings itself is admissible save only in those exceptional cases set out in section 284 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Plaintiff and appellee questions the jurisdiction of this court to review this case on appeal, on the ground that under the provisions of Act No. 1627 no appeal is allowed from decision of Court of First Instance on appeal from a court of a justice of the peace. Act No. 1627 did not go into effect until July 1, 1907, and this appeal was perfected prior to that date; this court having acquired jurisdiction was not deprived thereof under the terms of that act. (Pavon v. Philippine Islands T & T. Co., 1 5 Off. Gaz., 1076; Un Pak Leung v. Nogorra, 2 6 Off. Gaz., 154; Priolo v. Priolo, 3 6 Off Gaz., 218.)

The judgment of the trial court should be and is hereby, reserved, and judgment will be entered in favor of the defendant for the costs in the Court of First Instance. No costs will be allowed either party in this instance. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Willard and Tracey, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. 9 Phil. Rep., 247.

2. 9 Phil. Rep., 281.

3. Phil. Rep., 566.




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






March-1908 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-3457 March 2, 1908 - YU BUNUAN ET AL. v. ORESTES MARCAIDA

    010 Phil 265

  • G.R. No. L-4065 March 2, 1908 - BRUNO VILLANUEVA v. MAXIMA ROQUE

    010 Phil 270

  • G.R. No. L-3717 March 5, 1908 - FELIX VELASCO v. MARTIN MASA

    010 Phil 279

  • G.R. No. L-4237 March 5, 1908 - SERAFIN UY PIAOCO v. JOSE MCMICKING

    010 Phil 286

  • G.R. No. L-4447 March 6, 1908 - MURPHY v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS

    010 Phil 292

  • G.R. No. 4438 March 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JACINTO SUNGA, ET AL

    011 Phil 601

  • G.R. No. L-3811 March 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO BLANCO

    010 Phil 299

  • G.R. No. L-4026 March 7, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PASCUAL DULAY

    010 Phil 302

  • G.R. No. L-3880 March 9, 1908 - TEOPISTA CASTRO v. ANTONIO MARTINEZ GALLEGOS

    010 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. 4131 March 9, 1908 - SERAPIO AVERIA v. LUCIO REBOLDERA

    010 Phil 316

  • G.R. No. 4347 March 9, 1908 - JOSE ROGERS v. SMITH

    010 Phil 319

  • G.R. No. 3279 March 11, 1908 - CITY OF MANILA v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT ET AL.

    010 Phil 327

  • G.R. No. L-2129 March 12, 1908 - C. HEINZEN & CO. v. JAMES J. PETERSON, ET AL.

    010 Phil 339

  • G.R. No. L-3523 March 12, 1908 - CARIDAD MUGURUZA v. INT’L. BANKING CORP.

    010 Phil 347

  • G.R. No. L-3855 March 12, 1908 - EUFEMIA LORETO v. JULIO HERRERA

    010 Phil 354

  • G.R. No. L-3907 March 12, 1908 - ROMAN ABAYA v. DONATA ZALAMERO

    010 Phil 357

  • G.R. No. L-4085 March 12, 1908 - CARLS PALANCA TANGUINLAY v. FRANCISCO G. QUIROS

    010 Phil 360

  • G.R. No. L-4087 March 12, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. AMADOR BARRIOS

    010 Phil 366

  • G.R. No. L-4341 March 12, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARCOS ROJO

    010 Phil 369

  • G.R. No. L-469 March 13, 1908 - T. H. PARDO DE TAVERA v. HOLY ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH

    010 Phil 371

  • G.R. No. L-3848 March 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ANDRES GIMENO

    010 Phil 380

  • G.R. No. 4146 March 13, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PETRA DE GUZMAN

    010 Phil 382

  • G.R. No. L-3951 March 14, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FELICIANO GARCIA

    010 Phil 384

  • G.R. No. L-4169 March 14, 1908 - WILHELM BAUERMANN v. MAXIMA CASAS

    010 Phil 386

  • G.R. No. L-4205 March 16, 1908 - JULIAN CABAÑAS v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    010 Phil 393

  • G.R. No. L-4077 March 17, 1908 - MACARIA MATIAS v. AGUSTIN ALVAREZ

    010 Phil 398

  • G.R. No. L-4127 March 17, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CHARLES J. KOSEL

    010 Phil 409

  • G.R. No. 4051 March 18, 1908 - CATALINA BERNARDO v. VICENTE GENATO

    011 Phil 603

  • G.R. No. L-3606 March 18, 1908 - IGNACIO ACASIO v. FELICISIMA ALBANO

    010 Phil 410

  • G.R. No. L-3699 March 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BENITO CUSI

    010 Phil 413

  • G.R. No. L-4007 March 18, 1908 - WARNER BARNES & CO. v. E. DIAZ & CO.

    010 Phil 418

  • G.R. No. L-4213 March 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. POTENCIANO REYES

    010 Phil 423

  • G.R. No. L-4233 March 18, 1908 - EXEQUIEL DELGADO v. MANUEL RIESGO

    010 Phil 428

  • G.R. No. L-4318 March 18, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. GENEROSO ACADEMIA

    010 Phil 431

  • G.R. No. L-4147 March 19, 1908 - AGRIPINO DE LA RAMA v. CONCEPCION SANCHEZ, ET AL.

    010 Phil 432

  • G.R. No. L-4209 March 19, 1908 - INTERNATIONAL BANKING CORP. v. PILAR CORRALES

    010 Phil 435

  • G.R. No. L-3904 March 20, 1908 - KO POCO v. H. B. McCOY

    010 Phil 442

  • G.R. No. L-4104 March 20, 1908 - JAO IGCO v. W. MORGAN SHUSTER

    010 Phil 448

  • G.R. No. L-4155 March 20, 1908 - RUPERTO BELZUNCE v. VALENTINA FERNANDEZ

    010 Phil 452

  • G.R. No. L-4158 March 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MATEO CARIÑO

    010 Phil 456

  • G.R. No. L-4196 March 20, 1908 - BENWIT ULLMANN v. FELIX ULLMANN and CO.

    010 Phil 459

  • G.R. No. L-4241 March 20, 1908 - AGUSTIN G. GAVIERES v. ADMIN. F THE INTESTATE ESTATE OF LUISA

    010 Phil 472

  • G.R. No. L-4399 March 20, 1908 - BENITO LEGARDA v. S. L. P. ROCHA Y RUIZDELGADO

    010 Phil 474

  • G.R. No. L-4436 March 20, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO CASTRO DI TIAN LAY

    010 Phil 476

  • G.R. No. 4109 March 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JULIANA TORRES

    011 Phil 606

  • G.R. No. L-3968 March 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. MARCOS LOPEZ

    010 Phil 479

  • G.R. No. L-3975 March 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ANGEL MARIN

    010 Phil 481

  • G.R. No. L-4167 March 21, 1908 - RAFAELA SALMO v. LUISA ICAZA

    010 Phil 485

  • G.R. No. L-4300 March 21, 1908 - MARIA BARRETTO v. LEONA REYES

    010 Phil 489

  • G.R. No. L-4324 March 21, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CASIMIRO OLLALES

    010 Phil 493

  • G.R. No. L-3550 March 23, 1908 - GO CHIOCO v. INCHAUSTI & CO.

    010 Phil 495

  • G.R. No. L-3780 March 23, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO SELLANO

    010 Phil 498

  • G.R. No. L-4132 March 23, 1908 - IN RE: MARIA SIASON Y MADRID DE LEDESMA

    010 Phil 504

  • G.R. No. L-4215 March 23, 1908 - LUCIO I. LIMPANGCO v. JUANA MERCADO

    010 Phil 508

  • G.R. No. L-4274 March 23, 1908 - JOSE ALANO v. JOSE BABASA

    010 Phil 511

  • G.R. No. L-4352 March 24, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. RICARDO BAYOT

    010 Phil 518

  • G.R. No. L-2674 March 25, 1908 - JOAQUIN JOVER Y COSTAS v. INSULAR GOV’T., ET AL.

    010 Phil 522

  • G.R. No. L-3357 March 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. A. W. PRAUTCH

    010 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. L-4012 March 25, 1908 - MAXIMO CORTES Y PROSPERO v. CITY OF MANILA

    010 Phil 567

  • G.R. No. L-4063 March 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN MARIÑO, ET AL.

    010 Phil 571

  • G.R. No. L-4091 March 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BERNABE BACHO

    010 Phil 574

  • G.R. No. L-4354 March 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. CANDIDO POBLETE

    010 Phil 578

  • G.R. No. L-4418 March 25, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. ANDRES V. ESTRADA

    010 Phil 583

  • G.R. No. L-3339 March 26, 1908 - ROSA LLORENTE v. CEFERINO RODRIGUEZ

    010 Phil 585

  • G.R. No. L-3812 March 26, 1908 - PHIL. SUGAR ESTATES DEV’T. CO. v. BARRY BALDWIN

    010 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. L-4100 March 26, 1908 - MARIA SINGAYAN v. CALIXTA MABBORANG

    010 Phil 601

  • G.R. No. L-4121 March 26, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO GARCIA

    010 Phil 603

  • G.R. No. L-4175 March 26, 1908 - A. W. BEAN v. B. W. CADWALLADER CO.

    010 Phil 606

  • G.R. No. L-4207 March 26, 1908 - JUAN VALLE v. SIXTO GALERA

    010 Phil 619

  • G.R. No. L-4265 March 26, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LUIS PASCUAL

    010 Phil 621

  • G.R. No. L-4322 March 26, 1908 - INOCENTE MARTINEZ v. G. E. CAMPBELL

    010 Phil 626

  • G.R. No. L-4376 March 26, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. LIM SIP

    010 Phil 627

  • G.R. No. L-4420 March 26, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. NARCISO CAGUIMBAL

    010 Phil 630

  • G.R. No. 4160 March 26, 1908 - ANGEL GUSTILO, ET AL. v. FEDERICO MATTI, ET AL.

    011 Phil 611

  • G.R. No. 3539 March 27, 1908 - MANUEL RAMIREZ, ET AL. v. INSULAR GOVERNMENT

    011 Phil 617

  • G.R. No. 4372 March 27, 1908 - ENRIQUE M. BARRETTO v. CITY OF MANILA

    011 Phil 624

  • G.R. No. L-3612 March 27, 1908 - DOMINGO LIM v. JOSE LIM

    010 Phil 633

  • G.R. No. L-3762 March 27, 1908 - GOV’T. OF THE PHIL. ISLANDS v. ALEJANDRO AMECHAZURRA

    010 Phil 637

  • G.R. No. L-4037 March 27, 1908 - LIM JAO LU v. H. B. McCOY

    010 Phil 641

  • G.R. No. L-4200 March 27, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. SEGUNDO SAMONTE

    010 Phil 642

  • G.R. No. L-4203 March 27, 1908 - MANUEL CRAME SY PANCO v. RICARDO GONZAGA

    010 Phil 646

  • G.R. No. L-4469A March 27, 1908 - FELIPE G. CALDERON v. JOSE MCMICKING

    010 Phil 650

  • G.R. No. L-4017 March 28, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. PEDRO MARIÑO

    010 Phil 652

  • G.R. No. L-3007 March 30, 1908 - ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH v. MUNICIPALITY OF BADOC

    010 Phil 659

  • G.R. No. L-4198 March 30, 1908 - JUAN MERCADO v. JOSE ABANGAN

    010 Phil 676

  • G.R. No. L-4222 March 30, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. BASILIO CERNIAS

    010 Phil 682

  • G.R. No. L-4281 March 30, 1908 - JOSE GARRIDO v. AGUSTIN ASENCIO

    010 Phil 691

  • G.R. No. L-4377 March 30, 1908 - UNITED STATES v. VICENTE GARCIA GAVIERES

    010 Phil 694

  • G.R. No. L-3469 March 31, 1908 - JOSEFA AGUIRRE v. MANUEL VILLABA

    010 Phil 701

  • G.R. No. L-4078 March 31, 1908 - CONCEPCION MENDIOLA v. NICOLASA PACALDA

    010 Phil 705

  • G.R. No. L-4257 March 31, 1908 - SIMON MOSESGELD SANTIAGO v. RUFINO QUIMSON ET AL.

    010 Phil 707