ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 118381. March 13, 2000]

T & C DEV'T. CORP. vs. CA.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated MAR 13 2000.

G.R. No. 118381 (T & C Development Corporation vs. Court of Appeals).

For resolution is a motion filed by petitioner T & C Development Corporation seeking a modification of the decision in this case so as (1) to include an express order to private respondent Eligio de Guzman to vacate the premises in question, and (2) to order him to pay attorney's fees of at least P30,000.00.

In a decision, dated January 13, 1994, the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch VII, Manila ordered private respondent to vacate the apartment building at 433 P. Gomez Street, Quiapo, Manila for failure to pay during the period November 1, 1992 - February 1993 the increased monthly rental of P1,800.00. Private respondent appealed to the Regional Trial Court, Branch 5, Manila, which, in its decision dated July 11, 1994, reversed the decision of the Metropolitan Trial Court. Petitioner filed a petition for review in the Court of Appeals which affirmed with modification the decision of the Regional Trial Court in a decision, dated December 15, 1994. On appeal to this Court, judgment was rendered as follows:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and private respondent is ORDERED to pay monthly rents in the amount of P840.00 from November 1992 to December 1992; P1,008.00 from January 1993 to December 1993; P1,209.60 from January 1994 to December 1994; P1,451.52 from January 1995 to December 1995; P1,741.82 from January 1996 to December 1996; P2,090.19 from January 1997 to December 1997; P2,403.72 from January 1998 to December 1998; and, P2,764.27 from January 1999, until private respondent has vacated the premises. Costs against private respondent.

This is based on the explicit statement by this Court that there was cause for the ejectment of private respondent and, for this reason, private respondent is ordered to pay the monthly rentals until he "has vacated the premises." An order to private respondent to vacate the premises is thus implicit. However, to avoid any possibility of error in the execution of the decision, the appropriate modification should be made in the dispositive portion of the decision.

With regard to the prayer for attorney's fees, the Court finds no basis for granting the same considering Art. 2208 of the Civil Code.

Accordingly, the Court RESOLVED to GRANT in part the motion of petitioner T & C Development Corporation by amending the dispositive portion of its decision, dated October 26, 1999, as follows:

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and private respondent is ORDERED: (a) to immediately vacate the subject premises and to surrender possession thereof to petitioner; and (b) to pay monthly rents in the amount of P840.00 from November 1992 to December 1992; P1,008.00 from January 1993 to December 1993; P1,209.60 from January 1994 to December 1994; P1,451.52 from January 1995 to December 1995; P1,741.82 from January 1996 to December 1996; P2,090.19 from January 1997 to December 1997; P2,403.72 from January 1998 to December 1998; and, P2,764.27 from January 1999, until private respondent has vacated the premises. Costs against private respondent.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE