SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

G.R. No. L-2554 January 22, 1908
ANTONIO MINA vs. VICTORINO LUSTINA -->

EN BANC

G.R. No. L-2554 January 22, 1908

ANTONIO MINA,Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. VICTORINO LUSTINA,Defendant-Appellee.

Maximino Mina, for appellant.
Jose del Valle, for appellee.

WILLARD, J. :chanrobles virtual law library

The plaintiff and appellant moved for a new trial in the court below on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence, but he took no exception to the order denying such motion. We can not, therefore, review the evidence.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The court found as a fact that the allegation of the complaint were not proven. This is a sufficient finding to support a judgment acquitting the defendant of the complaint. No facts are stated in the decision which in any way indicate that the plaintiff is the owner of the land in question, or, has any interest therein.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The answer contains a general denial and an admission that the defendant is in possession of a part of the land described in the complaint. There is nothing in the answer which in any way admits that the plaintiff is the owner of the land or has any interest therein.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

The judgment of the court below is affirmed, with the costs of this instance against the appellant. So ordered.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

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