Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1964 > February 1964 Decisions > G.R. No. L-15891 February 29, 1964 - ANGEL FUNIESTAS v. SEVERO ARCE:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-15891. February 29, 1964.]

IN RE: PETITION FOR CONSOLIDATION OF OWNERSHIP OF REAL PROPERTY, ANGEL FUNIESTAS, Petitioner-Appellee, v. SEVERO ARCE, Respondent-Appellant.

Pedro E. Fontelera for Petitioner-Appellee.

Gregorio Dolojan for Respondent-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. APPEALS: SUPREME COURT CANNOT ENTERTAIN DIRECT APPEAL WHERE THE FINDING OF THE LOWER COURT THAT THE CASE INVOLVES ONLY A QUESTION OF LAW IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE RECORD. — Facts: In a proceeding before a court of first instance for consolidation of ownership of real property allegedly sold with pacto de retro, the trial court referred the case to the clerk of court for the presentation of evidence because the pleadings raised questions of fact, the record discloses, however, that no such evidence was ever presented. This notwithstanding, the lower court ordered the parties to submit their memoranda and thereafter issued the order appealed from declaring the ownership of petitioner over the land involved as consolidated. The appeal was brought directly to the Supreme Court on the finding of the lower court that the question involved was merely one of law. Held: The finding of the lower court that there was no question as to the nature of the contract entered into between he parties is not supported by the record, and the basic petition should not have been resolved without the parties submitting their respective evidence on the question of fact involved. Order reversed and case remanded for further proceedings.


D E C I S I O N


DIZON, J.:


On July 10, 1948, Severo Arce executed a document entitled "Deed 797 of Sale with the Right to Repurchase of Real Property" in relation to a parcel of riceland situated in barrio Feria, San Felipe, Zambales, in favor of Angel Funiestas, for the sum of P2,750.00. The contract provided that the vendor, his heirs, executors, administrators or assigns, could repurchase the property within ten years from the date of its execution, and that, upon their failure to do so, absolute title thereto shall vest in the vendee without the need of executing another deed to that effect.

The vendor having failed to redeem the property within the stipulated period, Funiestas filed on December 10, 1958 with the Court of First Instance of Zambales (Civil Case No. 145) a petition to consolidate his ownership over the property. Arce opposed the petition alleging, (1) that the purchase price was inadequate; (2) that petitioner failed to make a demand upon him to redeem the property one year prior to the expiration of the ten-year redemption period, as had been agreed upon verbally between them. As a result he prayed that he be allowed an extension of one year from the date of his opposition within which to effect the repurchase.

In an order dated January 16, 1959, the Court referred the case to the Clerk of Court for the presentation of evidence in view of the questions of fact arising from their pleadings. However, as far as the record discloses, no such evidence was ever presented. On the other hand, on January 31 of the same year, the Court issued another order to the effect that, as the question for resolution was merely one of law, the parties should submit "their simultaneous memoranda on the matter." This they did, and thereafter the court issued the order appealed from declaring "the ownership of petitioner over the land more particularly described in the pacto de retro sale Annex ‘A’, . . . consolidated" (Record on Appeal, p. 29).

The findings of the Court to the effect that the question involved was merely one of law (Record on Appeal, pp. 18-19) and that there was "no question as to the nature of the contract entered into between the parties" (Ibid, pp. 28-29) are not supported by the record. Aside from the allegations made in appellant’s opposition mentioned heretofore — which obviously raised questions of fact — appellant, in his memorandum (Record on Appeal, p. 22) maintained that the true contract between the parties was not a sale with right to repurchase but one "of pledge" (meaning probably equitable mortgage). Consequently, the basic petition should not have been resolved without requiring the parties to submit their respective evidence on the questions of fact involved.

WHEREFORE, the order appealed from is hereby set aside, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings. Without costs.

Bengzon, C.J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion, Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Paredes, 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






February-1964 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-19567 February 5, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SOLEDAD NERY

  • G.R. No. L-19771 February 27, 1964 - TEOFILO C. RODRIGUEZ v. DBP

  • G.R. No. L-14908 February 28, 1964 - SINFORIANO V. URGELIO, ET AL v. SERGIO OSMEÑA, JR., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-15946 February 28, 1964 - PROVINCE OF BULACAN v. B. E. SAN DIEGO, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-16574 February 28, 1964 - ALIPIO N. CASILAN, ET AL v. RAYMOND TOMASSI, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17185 February 28, 1964 - GSIS v. GSIS EMPLOYEES’ ASSO., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-17647 February 28, 1964 - HERMINIA GODUCO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18035 February 28, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELINO C. SIMON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-18344 February 28, 1964 - IN RE: TAN TEN KOC v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18550 February 28, 1964 - IN RE: ALBERT ONG LING CHUAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18768 February 28, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIA L. TAMBA

  • G.R. No. L-18792 February 28, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GUILLERMO BELLO

  • G.R. No. L-19325 February 28, 1964 - ISABEL, Q. JUECO v. FELICIDAD FLORES

  • G.R. No. L-19448 February 28, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEPITO ARGANA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19618 February 28, 1964 - LEONARDO SANTOS, ET AL. v. HON. ANGEL H. MOJICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19635 February 28, 1964 - TOMAS Q. SORIANO v. TEOFILO ABETO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-20368 February 28, 1964 - CRISPIN BONGCAWIL v. PROVINCIAL BOARD OF LANAO DEL, NORTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-21776 February 28, 1964 - NICANOR G. JORGE v. JOVENCIO Q. MAYOR

  • G.R. No. L-22451 February 28, 1964 - GILBERT SEMON, ET AL. v. HON. PIO R. MARCOS

  • G.R. No. L-15547 February 29, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. JOSEPH ARCACHE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15644 February 29, 1964 - MAXIMO L. GALVEZ, ET AL v. MARIANO SEVERO TUASON Y DE LA PAZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15746 February 29, 1964 - SALVADOR A. CABALUNA, JR., v. HEIRS OF ALEJANDRA CORDOVA

  • G.R. No. L-15816 February 29, 1964 - EDUARDO E. PASCUAL v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-15890 February 29, 1964 - VICENTE SALAZAR v. HON. JOSE M. SANTOS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-15891 February 29, 1964 - ANGEL FUNIESTAS v. SEVERO ARCE

  • G.R. No. L-16082 February 29, 1964 - BENIGNO MALINAO v. LUZON SURETY CO. INC.

  • G.R. No. L-16340 February 29, 1964 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. HEALD LUMBER CO.

  • G.R. No. L-16440 February 29,1964

    PHIL. ENGINEERS’ SYNDICATE, INC. v. HON. JOSE S. BAUTISTA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18103 February 29, 1964 - OSCAR LAGMAN, ET AL v. INVESTMENT PLANNING CORP. OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18508 February 29, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARSENIO MIRANDA

  • G.R. No. L-18976 February 29, 1964 - DAMASO PEÑARA, ET AL v. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF RIZAL, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-18899 February 29, 1964 - OWNERS OF 51 OF THE JACKPOT SLOT MACHINES v. DIRECTOR OF THE NBI

  • G.R. No. L-19096 February 29, 1964 - CARLOS B. SIY v. TAN GUN GA, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19101 February 29, 1964 - EMILIANO DALANDAN, ET AL. v. VICTORIA JULIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19140 February 29, 1964 - NG HUA TO, ET AL v. EMILIO GALANG, ETC.

  • G.R. No. L-19152 February 29, 1964 - TAN TIONG TICK v. PHILIP MANUFACTURING CORP.

  • G.R. No. L-19164 February 29, 1964 - CEBU PORTLAND CEMENT CO. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COM., ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19242 February 29, 1964 - SIGBE LASUD, ET AL v. SANTAY LASUD, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19243 February 29, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BUENAVENTURA T. MARIANO

  • G.R. Nos. L-19273-74 February 29, 1964 - STA. CECILIA SAWMILLS, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-19553 February 29, 1964 - JOSE V. RODRIGUEZ, ET AL. v. IGNACIO SANTOS DIAZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-19981 February 29, 1964 - GODOFREDO QUIMSING v. EDUARDO TAJANGLANGIT

  • G.R. No. L-20239 February 29, 1964 - DEPORTATION BOARD, ET AL v. HON. GUILLERMO S. SANTOS, ET AL

  • G.R. No. L-22246 February 29, 1964 - VIRGINIO A. ASTILLA v. HON. ELIAS B. ASUNCION, ET AL