Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1953 > May 1953 Decisions > G.R. No. L-5089 May 15, 1953 - JUAN MORTOS v. VICTOR ELLO, ET AL.

093 Phil 49:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-5089. May 15, 1953.]

JUAN MORTOS, Petitioner, v. VICTOR ELLO and Lt. OSCAR GONZALES, Respondents.

G. M. Trinidad for Petitioner.

Juan A. Baes for Respondents.


SYLLABUS


1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; CIVIL LIABILITY; RESERVATION OF SEPARATE CIVIL ACTION THEREFOR; REPLEVIN TO RECOVER STOLEN PROPERTY. - Although by the failure of the offended party in a theft case to reserve expressly his right to institute a separate civil action for the civil liability of a thief, action by the offended party for the recovery of the stolen property is impliedly included in the criminal action, yet if it is one of the original defendants in the theft case who, having been excluded from the information for having bought the property without knowledge that it had been stolen, now institutes the separate civil action of replevin for the recovery of the said property, which happens to be in the possession of the offended party, the action for replevin cannot prosper, the offended party having been found to be the rightful owner. Section 9 of Rule 69 provides that possession of the disputed property should be adjudicated to the one entitled thereto.


D E C I S I O N


PARAS, C.J. :


Victor Ello found his jeep missing in the place where he parked it on the night of October 2, 1947, in Tambo, Parañaque, Rizal. On October 28, 1947, it was found in the possession of Juan Mortos in Lucena, Quezon, from whom Victor Ello recovered the jeep through Lt. Oscar Gonzales of the Military Police. It turned out that Juan Mortos bought the vehicle from Marcelino Felipe, Vicente Santos Pañganiban and Alejandro Gregorio, one of whom posed as Victor Ello. On November 18, 1947, Juan Mortos instituted the present replevin suit against Victor Ello and Lt. Oscar Gonzales in the Court of First Instance of Quezon, for the delivery of the jeep. The defendant Victor Ello filed an answer, alleging that he is the owner of said jeep which was stolen on October 2, 1947, and sold to the plaintiff by the thieves, and setting up a counterclaim for damages.

For his failure to file an answer, the defendant Oscar Gonzales was declared in default. After trial, the Court of First Instance of Quezon rendered a decision, ordering the plaintiff to return and deliver the jeep in question to the defendant Victor Ello, reserving to the plaintiff the right to proceed against the persons who sold said jeep to him.

In the meantime, or while the replevin suit was pending, Victor Ello caused a criminal prosecution for theft to be commenced on February 24, 1948 against Marcelino Felipe, Vicente Santos Pañganiban, Alejandro Gregorio and Juan Mortos in the Court of First Instance of Rizal. The information was subsequently dismissed as to Juan Mortos who was found by the fiscal to have bought the jeep without knowing that it was stolen, and as to Alejandro Gregorio in view of his willingness to testify as a witness for the Government. Marcelino Felipe and Vicente Santos Pañganiban were found guilty and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of from 6 years and 1 day to 8 years, 8 months and 1 day of prision mayor, and to indemnify Victor Ello in the sum of P1,200.

The plaintiff Juan Mortos, appealed to the Court of Appeals which affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Quezon, with the only modification that if he should fail to deliver the jeep in question to the defendant Victor Ello, its value (P1,200.00) should be paid to the latter. The plaintiff has appealed by way of certiorari.

Petitioner-appellant’s main contention is that, because of the failure of the respondent-appellee, Victor Ello to expressly waive or reserve his right to institute it separately, the action for recovery of civil liability was impliedly instituted with the criminal case for theft, in which the information was dismissed as to the appellant, and Marcelino Felipe and Vicente Santos Pañganiban alone were found guilty and, in addition to the penalty of imprisonment, were ordered to pay an indemnity of P1,200 to the appellee, Victor Ello. The appellant thus insists that the Court of First Instance of Quezon had no jurisdiction to proceed with the present replevin suit, or that it was at least improper for said court to order the delivery of the jeep in question to Victor Ello who had already been awarded indemnity in the sum of P1,200 in the criminal case against Marcelino Felipe and Vicente Santos Pañganiban.

Appellant’s contention is untenable, because the replevin suit was instituted by him and the appellee Victor Ello merely assumed a defensive position; and it was indeed unnecessary for the latter to make the necessary reservation in the criminal case for the reason, as correctly stated by the Court of Appeals, that he was legally in possession of the jeep. Although Victor Ello set up a counterclaim for damages, his answer alleged ownership in himself, and both the trial court and the Court of Appeals properly awarded the possession of the jeep to said appellee, inasmuch as section 9, Rule 62, of the Rules of Court provides that possession of the disputed property should be adjudicated to the one entitled thereto.

Moreover, although in the criminal case the defendants Marcelino Felipe and Vicente Santos Pañganiban were sentenced to indemnify Victor Ello in the sum of P1,200, the latter as found by the Court of Appeals, has not received or tried to enforce that indemnity, - not to mention the fact that, under Article 105 of the Revised Penal Code, the owner of stolen property is entitled to its restitution.

Of course, the right of the appellee Victor Ello to the possession of the jeep in question, is predicated upon article 464 of the old Civil Code, which provides that one who has lost any movable property may recover it from whomsoever possesses it, and the possessor is entitled to reimbursement of any price paid by him for the lost or stolen property if he has acquired it in good faith at a public sale, which is admittedly not true in the case at bar. The appealed decision awarding in favor of Victor Ello the possession of the jeep or its value (P1,200.00) is correct, because section 9 of Rule 62 authorizes "judgment in the alternative for the delivery thereof to the party entitled to the same, or for the value in case delivery cannot be made."cralaw virtua1aw library

Wherefore, the appealed decision is affirmed with costs against the petitioner-appellant. So ordered.

Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo and Labrador, JJ., concur.




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






May-1953 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-5078 May 4, 1953 - LUIS FRANCISCO v. MAXIMA VDA. DE BLAS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-5195 May 4, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NAPOLEON LIBRE, ET AL.

    093 Phil 5

  • G.R. No. L-3772 May 13, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAUTI LINGCUAN, ET AL.

    093 Phil 9

  • G.R. No. L-5217 May 13, 1953 - VICENTE VILORIA v. ISIDORO VILORIA

    093 Phil 15

  • G.R. No. L-5292 May 13, 1953 - PELAGIA ARANTE v. ARCADIO ROSEL

    093 Phil 18

  • G.R. No. L-5331 May 13, 1953 - NG YOUNG v. ANA VILLA

    093 Phil 21

  • G.R. No. L-4258 May 15, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO FRANCISCO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 28

  • G.R. No. L-4716 May 15, 1953 - FELICISIMA DAPITON v. NICOLAS VELOSO

    093 Phil 39

  • G.R. No. L-4847 May 15, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MOROS ANSANG

    093 Phil 44

  • G.R. No. L-5089 May 15, 1953 - JUAN MORTOS v. VICTOR ELLO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 49

  • G.R. No. L-5117 May 15, 1953 - IN RE: FRANCISCO ANG VELOSO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 52

  • G.R. No. L-5529 May 15, 1953 - FORTUNATA RAMENTO, ET AL. v. GUADALUPE COSUANGCO

    093 Phil 56

  • G.R. No. L-5594 May 15, 1953 - ATOK-BIG WEDGE MINING CO., INC. v. ATOK-BIG WEDGE MUTUAL BENEFIT ASSOC.

    093 Phil 62

  • G.R. No. L-6165 May 15, 1953 - ISABELO CENTENO, v. DOLORES GALLARDO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 63

  • G.R. No. L-3708 May 18, 1953 - ROYAL L. RUTTER v. PLACIDO J. ESTEBAN

    093 Phil 68

  • G.R. No. L-4880 May 18, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUTIQUIANO DE LOS SANTOS, ET AL.

    093 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. L-4565 May 20, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. APOLONIO RAIZ

    093 Phil 94

  • G.R. No. L-5963 May 20, 1953 - LEYTE-SAMAR SALES CO., ET AL. v. SULPICIO V. CEA, ET AL.

    093 Phil 100

  • G.R. No. L-4376 May 22, 1953 - ASSOCIATION OF CUSTOMS BROKERS, INC. v. MUNICIPAL BOARD, ET AL.

    093 Phil 107

  • G.R. No. L-4572 May 22, 1953 - DOLORITO M. FELICIANO, ET AL. v. DIRECTOR OF PATENTS

    093 Phil 113

  • G.R. No. L-5029 May 22, 1953 - IN RE: CHUA TIONG CHIA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 117

  • G.R. No. L-5829 May 22, 1953 - JOSE NONO v. RUPERTO NEQUIA y OTROS

    093 Phil 120

  • G.R. Nos. L-4517-20 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GODOFREDO ROMERO

    093 Phil 128

  • G.R. No. L-4628 May 25, 1953 - VICENTE M. JOVEN v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    093 Phil 134

  • G.R. No. L-4641 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs.PEDRO JIMENEZ, ET AL.

    093 Phil 137

  • G.R. No. L-4888 May 25, 1953 - JOSE MERZA v. PEDRO LOPEZ PORRAS

    093 Phil 142

  • G.R. No. L-5086 May 25, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VENTURA LANAS

    093 Phil 147

  • G.R. No. L-5236 May 25, 1953 - JOSE TORRES v. HERMENEGILDA SICAT VDA. DE MORALES

    093 Phil 155

  • G.R. No. L-5677 May 25, 1953 - LA CAMPANA COFFEE FACTORY, INC., ET AL. v. KAISAHAN NG MANGGAGAWA SA LA CAMPANA, ET AL.

    093 Phil 160

  • G.R. No. L-6108 May 25, 1953 - FRANCISCO DE BORJA, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO TAN, ET AL.

    093 Phil 167

  • G.R. No. L-6528 May 25, 1953 - MUNICIPALITY OF BOCAUE, ET AL. v. SEVERINO MANOTOK, ET AL.

    093 Phil 173

  • G.R. No. L-4478 May 27, 1953 - VICENTE DY SUN v. RICARDO BRILLANTES, ET AL.

    093 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. L-5127 May 27, 1953 - PEDRO BATUNGBAKAL v. NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL.

    093 Phil 182

  • G.R. No. L-5145 May 27, 1953 - FRANCISCO BASTIDA, ET AL. v. DY BUNCIO & CO. INC.

    093 Phil 195

  • G.R. Nos. L-5363 & L-5364 May 27, 1953 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DAIWAN LUCAS

    093 Phil 203

  • G.R. No. L-5554 May 27, 1953 - BENITO CHUA KUY v. EVERRETT STEAMSHIP CORPORATION

    093 Phil 207

  • G.R. No. L-4177 May 29, 1953 - IN RE: YAP CHIN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

    093 Phil 215

  • G.R. No. L-4433 May 29, 1953 - SALUD PATENTE v. ROMAN OMEGA

    093 Phil 218

  • G.R. No. L-4629 May 29, 1953 - JUAN D. SALVADOR, ET AL. v. GUILLERMO LOCSIN

    093 Phil 225

  • G.R. No. L-4645 May 29, 1953 - LORENZO GAUIRAN v. RUFINO SAHAGUN

    093 Phil 227

  • G.R. No. L-5184 May 29, 1953 - MACONDRAY & CO. v. CONNECTICUT FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD

    093 Phil 234

  • G.R. No. L-5282 May 29, 1953 - GERONIMO DE LOS REYES v. ARTEMIO ELEPAÑO, ET AL.

    093 Phil 239

  • G.R. No. L-5296 May 29, 1953 - GREGORIO ENRIQUEZ v. DONATO PEREZ

    093 Phil 246

  • G.R. No. L-5345 May 29, 1953 - COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FINANCE CORP. v. EUTIQUIANO GARCIA

    093 Phil 250

  • G.R. No. L-5406 May 29, 1953 - TALISAY-SILAY MILLING CO. v. TALISAY EMPLOYEES AND LABORERS’ UNION

    093 Phil 251

  • G.R. Nos. L-5426-28 May 29, 1953 - RAMON JOAQUIN v. ANTONIO C. NAVARRO

    093 Phil 257

  • G.R. No. L-5535 May 29, 1953 - U. S. COMMERCIAL CO. v. FORTUNATO F. HALILI

    093 Phil 271

  • G.R. No. L-5567 May 29, 1953 - JUAN EVANGELISTA v. GUILLERMO MONTAÑO

    093 Phil 275

  • G.R. No. L-5601 May 29, 1953 - LEON VELEZ v. VICENTE VARELA

    093 Phil 282

  • G.R. No. L-5640 May 29, 1953 - ESTEBAN G. LAPID v. GUILLERMO CABRERA, ETC., ET AL.

    093 Phil 285

  • G.R. No. L-5783 May 29, 1953 - MANILA TRADING & SUPPLY CO. v. MANILA TRADING LABOR ASSOCIATION

    093 Phil 288

  • Adm. Case No. 72 May 30, 1953 - PLACIDO MANALO v. PEDRO N. GAN

    093 Phil 292

  • G.R. No. L-4758 May 30, 1953 - CALTEX [PHIL. ] INC. v. PHILIPPINE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS

    093 Phil 295

  • G.R. No. L-4887 May 30, 1953 - UY MATIAO & CO., INC. v. CITY OF CEBU, ET AL.

    093 Phil 300

  • G.R. No. L-5301 May 30, 1953 - LOURDES T. PAGUIO v. MARIA ROSADO DE RUIZ

    093 Phil 306

  • G.R. No. L-6121 May 30, 1953 - MANUEL S. GAMALINDA v. JOSE V. YAP

    093 Phil 310