Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1963 > April 1963 Decisions > G.R. No. L-18815 April 27, 1963 - J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. FEDERICO CADAMPOG:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-18815. April 27, 1963.]

J. M. TUASON & CO., INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FEDERICO CADAMPOG, Defendant-Appellant.

Araneta & Araneta for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Ruiz, Puno & Sison, for Defendant-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. ACTIONS; ACTION NOT PREJUDICIAL TO ANOTHER IF ITS RESULT IS NOT DETERMINATIVE OF THE LATTER. — Defendant-appellant’s allegation that the action instituted by the widow of his donor seeking reconveyance from herein plaintiff of a lot that included the one donated to, and occupied by, Defendant-Appellant, is prejudicial to that filed against him by plaintiff, wherein the latter asserts ownership of the lot, is untenable, because the result of such action for reconveyance will not be determinative of the latter case, appellant not being a party to the reconveyance case.

2. ID.; APPELLANT WITHOUT RIGHT TO ENFORCE COMPROMISE; CASE AT BAR. — Appellant is not entitled to enforce a compromise agreement to which he was not a party. His action, if any, is against his immediate transferor or the privies of the latter.

3. PLEADING AND PRACTICE; MOTION TO DISMISS; WAIVER BY PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSION OF CASE FOR DECISION. — A motion to dismiss based on the pendency of another action is deemed waived by the presentation of evidence by the defendant and the submission of the case for decision on the merits without awaiting resolution of the said motion.


D E C I S I O N


REYES, J.B.L., J.:


On 5 September 1959, plaintiff J. M. Tuason & Co. filed Civil Case No. Q-3288 in the Court of First Instance of Rizal against Federico Cadampog, alleging that it is the registered owner of a parcel of land in Quezon City covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1267; that on or about January of 1952 defendants, without plaintiff’s consent, and through force, strategy, and stealth, entered into possession of 100 square meters inside plaintiff’s registered land, and asserted rights of possession derogatory of plaintiff’s indefeasible title, to the damage of the latter equivalent to P30.00 a month, which is the reasonable rental value of the premises in question; and prayed that defendant be adjudged without right of possession and title in said premises, that he be ordered to vacate the same and remove the constructions made thereon, and to pay P30.00 a month from entry until restoration of possession, together with costs.

In due time, defendant Cadampog answered the complaint, pleading inter alia that the premises involved were donated to him on 15 May 1950 by Agustin de Torres, as evidenced by a notarial deed of donation; that Agustin de Torres had purchased the property from the heir of the original owner, Telesforo Deudor; that plaintiff’s torrens title was null and void; that defendant had been, through his predecessors in interest, in adverse possession for more than 80 years; that J. M. Tuason & Co., Inc., was in estoppel to assert title; that plaintiff was a transferee of the land in bad faith from Rufina Guerrero, widow and heir of Agustin de Torres, through a compromise had in Civil Case Nos. Q-135, Q-139, Q-174, and Q-177 of Quezon City without defendant’s consent; that plaintiff had secured registration of its title through fraud, and held the land in question in trust for defendant; and prayed for the dismissal of the action, damages, and attorney’s fees.

After plaintiff’s reply, traversing defendant’s counterclaims, said defendant filed a motion to dismiss, alleging that Rufina Guerrero, the widow of his vendor, Agustin de Torres, had, on 27 February 1959, instituted an action (Civil Case No. 4057 of the same court) seeking reconveyance from plaintiff Tuason & Co. of a lot that included the one occupied by defendant; that said action was prejudicial to that filed by Tuason & Co. against him; and prayed that the latter be dismissed, or if not, held in abeyance until Case No. 4057 is finally decided. Plaintiff opposed the motion to dismiss.

Without awaiting resolution on the motion, defendant and plaintiff entered into the following stipulation of facts:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1 That plaintiff is a duly organized domestic corporation with domicile at Manila; that defendant is of age and is residing at Kalayaan St., near corner of BMA Ave., Bo. Tatalon, Quezon City;

2. That plaintiff is the registered owner of a parcel of land in Quezon City by T.C.T. No. 1267 (37686-Rizal) described in plan Pcs-3824, which certificate of title and plan are herewith submitted and admitted as Exhs. "A" and "B", respectively;

3. That on January 2, 1952, defendant, without the consent or knowledge of plaintiff, entered into the property covered by Exhs. "A" and "B" and occupied an area of 100 square meters therein, said area being indicated and marked in Exh. "B" as Exh. "B-1" ;

4. That for the occupation of said area of 100 square meters defendant has not paid plaintiff anything; that the fair rental value of said area is P30.00 per month; that defendant still occupied said area;

5. That said area is within the property covered by the compromise agreement dated March 16, 1953 and approved in toto in a judgment dated April 10, 1953 in Civil Cases No. Q-135, Q-139, Q-74, Q-177 and Q-186;

That said area was the object of a "DEED OF DONATION dated May 31, 1950 executed in favor of defendant by Agustin de Torres, deceased husband of Rufina Guerrero, one of his signatories in the above-stated compromise agreement of March 16, 1953, said deed of Donation being attached hereto as Exh. "1" for the defendant."cralaw virtua1aw library

Thereafter, the parties asked that the Clerk of Court be commissioned to receive further evidence. The court did as requested, and the plaintiff presented as Exhibit "A" Transfer Certificate of Title No. 1267, derived from O.C.T. No. 735 of Rizal, issued on 8 July 1914; while defendant introduced as Exhibit "1" the deed of donation executed in his favor by the late Agustin de Torres. Thereafter, the case was submitted for decision. On the basis of the documents and the stipulation, the court below adjudged in favor of plaintiff, as prayed for in the complaint. Defendant then appealed to the Court of Appeals, which certified the case to this Court as involving only questions of law.

The first error assigned is the refusal of the court of first instance to dismiss the case, or at least suspend proceedings until Civil Case No. 4059 (Guerrero Vda. de Torres v. J. M. Tuason & Co.) should be finally determined. Appellant argues that if Guerrero succeeded in obtaining reconveyance of the land claimed by her, it would settle the issues of the present appeal. This error is untenable. Since Guerrero’s husband had donated to appellant the lot now occupied by the latter prior to the institution of the reconveyance case, and since appellant is not a party therein, the result of that litigation will not be determinative of appellant’s case. Moreover, appellant had waived his motion to dismiss based on the pendency of the reconveyance case, by presenting evidence and submitting for decision on the merits the case at bar without awaiting resolution of the motion to dismiss.

The appellant’s alleged character of builder in good faith as well as his right to the benefits of the compromise agreement between the Deudors and appellee Tuason & Co., despite the fact that appellant is not a party thereto, are points that were raised and passed upon unfavorably to similar claimants in previous decisions of this Court Tuason & Co. v. Macalindong, L-15398, 29 Dec. 1962; Tuason & Co. v. Aguirre, L-15398, 31 Jan. 1963); and the rulings therein apply with equal force to appellant Cadampog. It is difficult to see how the compromise stipulation that the Deudors would make their vendees recognize the Title of Tuazon & Co., Inc., can be construed as a sale or conveyance in favor of Tuason & Co. by the Deudors, nor how appellant Cadampog can be entitled to enforce a compromise to which he was not a party. Aside from the fact that he paid nothing for the lot he occupies, being a mere donee, his action, if any, is against his immediate transferor or the privies of the latter.

We find no reversible error in the judgment appealed from, and, therefore, the same is affirmed. Costs against appellant Cadampog.

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Concepcion, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala and Makalintal, 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






April-1963 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-15699 April 22, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PROCOPIO CADERAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15807 April 22, 1963 - INES SANTOS, ET AL. v. MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF CALOOCAN, RIZAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16357 April 22, 1963 - MAGDALENA ESTATE, INC., ET AL. v. FRANCISCO BANGILAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17324 April 22, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. CLASICO TAJANLAÑGIT

  • G.R. No. L-17610 April 22, 1963 - JESUS R. FRANCO, ET AL. v. MONTE DE PIEDAD AND SAVINGS BANK

  • G.R. No. L-17738 April 22, 1963 - LUPO L. DIÑOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18080 April 22, 1963 - TAN KIM KEE v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18198 April 22, 1963 - LUZ BARRANTA v. INTERNATIONAL HARVESTER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-18610 April 22, 1963 - ANGEL BERMUDEZ, ET AL. v. MARGARITA FERNANDO

  • G.R. No. L-14853 April 23, 1963 - SANTIAGO LOPEZ, ET AL. v. JUAN MAGALLANES

  • G.R. No. L-15808 April 23, 1963 - FAUSTA AGCANAS, ET AL. v. BRUNO MERCADO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17467 April 23, 1963 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY v. JOSE YULO TOBIAS

  • G.R. No. L-17840 April 23, 1963 - MARIA ELENA ARAULLO v. MONTE DE PIEDAD SAVINGS BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-17880 and L-17881 April 23, 1963 - MALAYA WORKERS UNION, ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17908 April 23, 1963 - FLORENCIO MORENO v. HIGINIO MACADAEG

  • G.R. No. L-18206 April 23, 1963 - CIRIACO NOBEL v. VICENTE CABIJE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18263 April 23, 1963 - APOLINARIO DACANAY, ET AL. v. JAVIER PABALAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18371 April 23, 1963 - FIL-HISPANO LABOR UNION, ET AL. v. AGUSTIN P. MONTESA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18587 April 23, 1963 - APOLINARIO VALERIO v. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE & NATURAL RESOURCES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18810 April 23, 1963 - MD TRANSIT & TAXI CO., INC., ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO DE GUZMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18848 April 23, 1963 - ACOJE WORKERS’ UNION v. NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS’ UNION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18957 April 23, 1963 - VILLA-REY TRANSIT, INC. v. ELOY B. BELLO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20522 April 23, 1963 - APOLONIO GONZAGA v. CONRADO D. SENO

  • G.R. No. L-16998 April 24, 1963 - DANIEL ROMERO, ET AL. v. PALAWAN MANGANESE MINE, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17820 April 24, 1963 - LAND SETTLEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. GARCIA PLANTATION CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-18969 April 24, 1963 - KAPISANAN NG MGA MANGGAGAWA SA MANILA RAILROAD CO., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • A.C. No. 266 April 27, 1963 - PAZ ARELLANO TOLEDO v. JESUS B. TOLEDO

  • G.R. No. L-15731 April 27, 1963 - TAYTAY METHODIST COMMUNITY CHURCH, INC. v. ELADIO M. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17501 April 27, 1963 - MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY v. N. V. J. VAN DORP, LTD., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18117 April 27, 1963 - ROMAN GUERRERO v. JUAN AGUSTIN ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18258 April 27, 1963 - GUILLERMO COMEDA v. E. Q. CAJILOG, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18401 April 27, 1963 - PERFECTO JABALDE v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

  • G.R. No. L-18513 April 27, 1963 - SY HA, ET AL. v. EMILIO L. GALANG

  • G.R. No. L-18563 April 27, 1963 - RADIOWEALTH, INC. v. JOSE LAVIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18815 April 27, 1963 - J. M. TUASON & CO., INC. v. FEDERICO CADAMPOG

  • G.R. No. L-19343 April 27, 1963 - CRISPULO D. BELMI, ET AL. v. COURT OF AGRARIAN RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-12320 April 29, 1963 - VICENTA CORPUS, ET AL. v. JOSE A. V. CORPUS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15581 April 29, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MOROS TANJI AMBRAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15927 April 29, 1963 - VICENTE MARTELINO v. MAXIMO ESTRELLA

  • G.R. No. L-16924 April 29, 1963 - ANTONIA A. YEE v. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SCHOOL

  • G.R. No. L-17361 April 29, 1963 - FRANKLIN BAKER COMPANY OF THE PHILIPPINES v. SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

  • G.R. No. L-17846 April 29, 1963 - EDUARDA DUELLOME v. BONIFACIO GOTICO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18716 April 29, 1963 - CLEMENTE SUMCAD v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18835 April 29, 1963 - GASPAR DUMLAO v. MARCELO T. DOMINGO

  • G.R. No. L-19019 April 29, 1963 - MALAN BROTHERS WATCHMAN AGENCY v. MAGDALENO CONANAN, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 376 April 30, 1963 - JOSEFINA ROYONG v. ARISTON OBLENA

  • G.R. No. L-10963 April 30, 1963 - COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. AMERICAN RUBBER COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-13739 April 30, 1963 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. CARLOS MORAN SISON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14264 April 30, 1963 - RAYMUNDO B. TAN, ET AL. v. MUNICIPALITY OF PAGBILAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-14302 April 30, 1963 - JOSE MARGATE v. JULIA RABACAL

  • G.R. No. L-14752 April 30, 1963 - FRANCISCO R. CARIÑO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15639 April 30, 1963 - INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL AGRICULTURAL WORKERS ORGANIZATION v. JOSE S. BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15698 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ALEJANDRO SOMOZA v. ALICIA S. BANOGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15876 April 30, 1963 - MANUEL R. SOLIVIO v. FRANCISCO ARELLANO

  • G.R. No. L-16307 April 30, 1963 - FEDERICA ABALLE v. FORTUNATO SANTIAGO

  • G.R. No. L-16428 April 30, 1963 - LEALDA ELECTRIC CO., INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16620 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO BUMATAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-16688-90 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PACITA MADRIGAL-GONZALES

  • G.R. No. L-16790 April 30, 1963 - URBANO MAGBOO, ET AL. v. DELFIN BERNARDO

  • G.R. No. L-16880 April 30, 1963 - LUNETA MOTOR COMPANY v. ANTONIO MENENDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16922 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ROSE C. ELLIS v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-17173 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. THEODORE (TED) LEWIN

  • G.R. No. L-17431 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: REMEDIO SAN LUIS DE CASTRO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-17447 April 30, 1963 - GONZALO PUYAT & SONS, INC. v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17527 April 30, 1963 - SUN BROTHERS APPLIANCES, INC. v. DAMASO P. PEREZ

  • G.R. No. L-17791 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE TAN

  • G.R. No. L-17813 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-17916 April 30, 1963 - MAXIMO GOMEZ v. FOOKIEN TIMES COMPANY, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-17928 April 30, 1963 - SERVILLANO DE LA CRUZ, JR., ET AL. v. ASUNCION D. STA. MARIA

  • G.R. No. L-17938 April 30, 1963 - ESPERIDION TOLENTINO v. ADELA ONGSIAKO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-17946 April 30, 1963 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. ANTONIO PRIETO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18081 April 30, 1963 - SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION v. E. SORIANO, ETC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18044 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AMBROSIA VALLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18174 April 30, 1963 - FELIX LACSON v. FELINA LOZADA ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18220 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ROBERT MCCULLOCH DICK v. HELEN C. DICK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18270 April 30, 1963 - SAN PABLO OIL FACTORY, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18284 April 30, 1963 - IN RE: ANA ISABEL HENRIETTE ANTONIA CONCEPCION GEORGIANA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18332 April 30, 1963 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ESTANISLAO M. IGNACIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18481 April 30, 1963 - JOSE B. ESCUETA v. CITY MAYOR, ET AL.