7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
1/29
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-31163 November 6, 1929
URBANO SANTOS,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
JOSE C. BERNABE, ET AL.,defendants.
PABLO TIONGSON !" T#E PRO$INCIAL S#ERI%% O% BULACAN,appellants.
Arcadio Ejercito and Guevara, Francisco and Recto for appellants.
Eusebio Orense And Nicolas Belmonte for appellee.
$ILLA-REAL, J.:
This appeal was taken b the defendants Pablo Tion!son and the P"ovincial #he"iff of
Bulacan f"o$ the %ud!$ent of the Cou"t of &i"st of said p"ovince, whe"ein said defendant
Pablo Tion!son was o"de"ed to pa the plaintiff '"bano #antos the value of (() cavans
and *) kilos of pala, at the "ate of P* pe" cavan, without special p"onounce$ent as to
costs.
+n suppo"t of thei" appeal, the appellants assi!n the followin! alle!ed e""o"s co$$itted
b the lowe" cou"t in its %ud!$ent, to wit
. The cou"t e""ed in holdin! that it has been p"oved that in the cavans of pala attached
b the he"ein defendant Pablo Tion!son f"o$ the defendant ose C. Be"nabe we"e
included those clai$ed b the plaintiff in this cause.
/. The cou"t e""ed in o"de"in! the defendant Pablo Tion!son to pa the plaintiff the value
of (() cavans and *) kilos of pala, the "efund of which is clai$ed b said plaintiff.
*. The cou"t e""ed in denin! the defendants0 $otion fo" a new t"ial.1awpil.net
The followin! facts we"e conclusivel p"oved at the t"ial
1n Ma"ch /2, 3/), the"e we"e deposited in ose C. Be"nabe0s wa"ehouse b the
plaintiff '"bano #antos (() cavans and *) kilos of pala and b Pablo Tion!son ,2/4
cavans and 3 kilos of the sa$e !"ain.
1n said date, Ma"ch /2, 3/), Pablo Tion!son filed with the Cou"t of &i"st +nstance of
Bulacan a co$plaint a!ainst ose C. Be"nabe, to "ecove" f"o$ the latte" the ,2/4
cavans and 3 kilos of pala deposited in the defendant0s wa"ehouse. At the sa$e ti$e,
the application of Pablo Tion!son fo" a w"it of attach$ent was !"anted, and the
attachable p"ope"t of ose C. Be"nabe, includin! 3/5 cavans and * 6/ kilos of palafound b the she"iff in his wa"ehouse, we"e attached, sold at public auction, and the
p"oceeds the"eof delive"ed to said defendant Pablo Tion!son, who obtained %ud!$ent in
said case.
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
2/29
The he"ein plaintiff, '"bano #antos, inte"vened in the attach$ent of the pala, but upon
Pablo Tion!son0s filin! the p"ope" bond, the she"iff p"oceeded with the attach$ent,
!ivin! "ise to the p"esent co$plaint.
+t does not appea" that the sacks of pala of '"bano #antos and those of Pablo
Tion!son, deposited in ose C. Be"nabe0s wa"ehouse, bo"e an $a"ks o" si!ns, no"we"e the sepa"ated one f"o$ the othe".
The plaintiff-appellee '"bano #antos contends that Pablo Tion!son cannot clai$ the
3/5 cavans and * 7 kilos of pala attached b the defendant she"iff as pa"t of those
deposited b hi$ in ose C. Be"nabe0s wa"ehouse, because, in askin! fo" the
attach$ent the"eof, he i$pliedl acknowled!ed that the sa$e belon!ed to ose C.
Be"nabe and not to hi$.
+n the co$plaint filed b Pablo Tion!son a!ainst ose C. Be"nabe, civil case No. *448 of
the Cou"t of &i"st +nstance of Bulacan, it is alle!ed that said plaintiff deposited in thedefendant0s wa"ehouse ,2/4 cavans and 3 kilos of pala, the "etu"n of which, o" the
value the"eof, at the "ate of P* pe" cavan was clai$ed the"ein. 'pon filin! said
co$plaint, the plaintiff applied fo" a p"eli$ina" w"it of attach$ent of the defendant0s
p"ope"t, which was acco"din!l issued, and the defendant0s p"ope"t, includin! the 3/5
cavans and * 7 kilos of pala found b the she"iff in his wa"ehouse, we"e attached.
+t will be seen that the action b"ou!ht b Pablo Tion!son a!ainst ose C. Be"nabe is that
p"ovided in section /4/ of the Code of Civil P"ocedu"e fo" the delive" of pe"sonal
p"ope"t. Althou!h it is t"ue that the plaintiff and his atto"ne did not follow st"ictl the
p"ocedu"e p"ovided in said section fo" clai$in! the delive" of said pe"sonal p"ope"tneve"theless, the p"ocedu"e followed b hi$ $a be const"ued as e9uivalent the"eto,
conside"in! the p"ovisions of section / of the Code of Civil P"ocedu"e of the effect that
:the p"ovisions of this Code, and the p"oceedin!s unde" it, shall be libe"all const"ued,
in o"de" to p"o$ote its ob%ect and assist the pa"ties in obtainin! speed %ustice.:
;ibe"all const"uin!, the"efo"e, the above cited p"ovisions of section /4/ of the Code of
Civil P"ocedu"e, the w"it of attach$ent applied fo" b Pablo Tion!son a!ainst the
p"ope"t of ose C. Be"nabe $a be const"ued as a clai$ fo" the delive" of the sacks
of pala deposited b the fo"$e" with the latte".
The (() cavans and *) kilos of pala belon!in! to the plaintiff '"bano #antos, havin!
been $i
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
3/29
>he"efo"e, the %ud!$ent appealed f"o$ is he"eb $odified, and Pablo Tion!son is
he"eb o"de"ed to pa the plaintiff '"bano #antos the value of *3).53 cavans of pala at
the "ate of P* a cavan, without special p"onounce$ent as to costs. #o o"de"ed.
Avance!a, ".#., $treet, %illamor and Ostrand, ##., concur.
#onson, #., reserves is vote.#ons, #., dissents.
G.R. No. 1&1163 J!'r( 11, 1993
STATE IN$ESTMENT #OUSE, INC., petitione",
vs.
COURT O% APPEALS !" NORA B. MOULIC, "espondents.
Escober, Alon & Associates for petitioner.
'artin (. )antaleon for private respondents.
BELLOSILLO, J.:
The liabilit to a holde" in due cou"se of the d"awe" of checks issued to anothe" $e"el
as secu"it, and the "i!ht of a "eal estate $o"t!a!ee afte" e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
4/29
1n /4 Ma 3)), the t"ial cou"t dis$issed the Co$plaint as well as the Thi"d-Pa"t
Co$plaint, and o"de"ed #TATE to pa M1';+C P*,222.22 fo" atto"ne0s fees.
#TATE elevated the o"de" of dis$issal to the Cou"t of Appeals, but the appellate cou"t
affi"$ed the t"ial cou"t on the !"ound that the Notice of ?ishono" to M1';+C was $ade
beond the pe"iod p"esc"ibed b the Ne!otiable +nst"u$ents ;aw and that even if
#TATE did se"ve such notice on M1';+C within the "e!le$enta" pe"iod it would be of
no conse9uence as the checks should neve" have been p"esented fo" pa$ent. The
sale of the %ewel" was neve" effected= the checks, the"efo"e, ceased to se"ve thei"
pu"pose as secu"it fo" the %ewel".
>e a"e not pe"suaded.
The ne!otiabilit of the checks is not in dispute. +ndubitabl, the we"e ne!otiable. Afte"
all, at the p"e-t"ial, the pa"ties a!"eed to li$it the issue to whethe" o" not #TATE was a
holde" of the checks in due cou"se. 1
+n this "e!a"d, #ec. 8/ of the Ne!otiable +nst"u$ents ;aw p"ovides
#ec. 8/. *at constitutes a older in due course. A holde" in due
cou"se is a holde" who has taken the inst"u$ent unde" the followin!
conditions a That it is co$plete and "e!ula" upon its face= b That he
beca$e the holde" of it befo"e it was ove"due, and without notice that it
was p"eviousl dishono"ed, if such was the fact= c That he took it in !ood
faith and fo" value= d That at the ti$e it was ne!otiated to hi$ he had no
notice of an infi"$it in the inst"u$ent o" defect in the title of the pe"son
ne!otiatin! it.
Culled f"o$ the fo"e!oin!, aprima faciep"esu$ption e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
5/29
#ec. 3. +nstrument ow discar-ed. A ne!otiable inst"u$ent is
discha"!ed a B pa$ent in due cou"se b o" on behalf of the p"incipal
debto"= b B pa$ent in due cou"se b the pa"t acco$$odated, whe"e
the inst"u$ent is $ade o" accepted fo" his acco$$odation= c B the
intentional cancellation the"eof b the holde"= d B an othe" act which
will discha"!e a si$ple cont"act fo" the pa$ent of $one= e >hen the
p"incipal debto" beco$es the holde" of the inst"u$ent at o" afte" $atu"it
in his own "i!ht.
1bviousl, M1';+C $a onl invoke pa"a!"aphs c and d as possible !"ounds fo" the
discha"!e of the inst"u$ent. But, the intentional cancellation conte$plated unde"
pa"a!"aph c is that cancellation effected b dest"oin! the inst"u$ent eithe" b tea"in!
it up,*bu"nin! it,6o" w"itin! the wo"d :cancelled: on the inst"u$ent. The act of
dest"oin! the inst"u$ent $ust also be $ade b the holde" of the inst"u$ent
intentionall. #ince M1';+C failed to !et back possession of the post-dated checks, theintentional cancellation of the said checks is alto!ethe" i$possible.
1n the othe" hand, the acts which will discha"!e a si$ple cont"act fo" the pa$ent of
$one unde" pa"a!"aph d a"e dete"$ined b othe" e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
6/29
inst"u$ent, eithe" ve"ball o" b w"itin!, the fact that a specified inst"u$ent, upon p"ope"
p"oceedin!s taken, has not been accepted o" has not been paid, and that the pa"t
notified is e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
7/29
take action fo" the "ecove" of an unpaid balance on the p"incipal obli!ation si$pl
because he has chosen to e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
8/29
debt= 5 B the confusion o" $e"!e" of the "i!hts of c"edito" and debto"=
8 B co$pensation= 4 B novation . . . . .
) Ma"tin v. B"owns, (8 Ala 55/.
3 Reinha"t v. ;ucas, ) > a 544, 32 #E ((/.
2 A$ u" 8)3.
#ee A!baani, Co$$e"cial ;aws of the Philippines, ol. , 3)5 Ed.,
citin! Ellenbo!en v. #tate Bank, 3( NG #upp /().
/ T#N, /8 Ap"il 3)8, pp. 4-(.
* Philippine Bank of Co$$e"ce v. de e"a, No. ;-))4, /3 ?ece$be"
34/=4 #CRA 2/3.
5 Medina v. Philippine National Bank, 84 Phil 48.
8. A"t. /8. The sale of the thin! pled!ed shall e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
9/29
th"ee * #u"et A!"ee$ents e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
10/29
+n affi"$in! the dis$issal of the co$plaint, the appellate cou"t stated The ?eed ofEe said
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
11/29
Anothe" e""o" assi!ned b the appellant is the fact that the lowe" cou"t took intoconside"ation the docu$ents attached to the co$plaint as a pa"t the"eof, withouthavin! been e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
12/29
fo" fo"eclosu"e of $o"t!a!e, and a cop of the deed of $o"t!a!e was attached tothe co$plaint thus= acco"din! to this Cou"t, it would have been eas fo" thedefendants to specificall alle!e in thei" answe" whethe" o" not the hade
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
13/29
immaterial.Even if te jud-ment be subse0uent to te alienation, it is merel3declarator3, wit retroactive effect to te date wen te credit wasconstituted. . . . E$phasis #upplied Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines,ol. + Ed. pp. 8()-8(3
Pa"entheticall, the appellate cou"t0s obse"vation that the petitione"0s inte"ests a"esufficientl p"otected b a w"it of attach$ent on the p"ope"ties of &o"tune &inancePhils., +nc. has neithe" le!al no" factual basis.
1ne othe" point.
The t"ial cou"t dis"e!a"ded the e7/parteevidence adduced b the petitione" a!ainstA;EC1 when the latte" was decla"ed in default on the !"ound that the e7/
partep"oceedin!s we"e conducted b the ?eput Cle"k of Cou"t which is not allowed inacco"dance with the "ulin! in the case of 2im 8anu vs.Ramolete44 #CRA 5/8H3(8I. That "ulin! has al"ead been ove""uled in the late" case of Gocan-co vs."F+
of Ne-ros Occidental8( #CRA 52 H3))I, whe"ein we said
The "espondent Cou"t also decla"ed null and void :the "eception of evidence e7partebefo"e . . the deput cle"k of cou"t.: +t invoked what it te"$ed the doct"inal"ule laid down in the "ecent case of 2im 8an 9u vs.Ramolete, 44 #CRA 5*2,p"o$ul!ated on Au!ust /3, 3(8 inter alia decla"in! that a Cle"k of Cou"t is notle!all autho"i@ed to "eceive evidence e7/parte.
Now, that decla"ation does not "eflect lon! obse"ved and established %udicialp"actice with "espect to default cases. +t is not 9uite consistent, too, with theseve"al e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
14/29
Conse9uentl, the"e is no le!al i$pedi$ent to the ad$issibilit of the evidencep"esented b the petitione" a!ainst A;EC1.
These findin!s pave the wa to the "esolution of the case on its $e"its.
Respondent Chua ad$itted his liabilit unde" the va"ious #u"et A!"ee$ents eeste"n A!"o +ndust"ial Co"po"ation and AntonioRod"i!ue@ vs. Cou"t of Appeals, and #ia0s Auto$otive and ?iesel Pa"ts, +nc., F.R. No.)/88), Au!ust /2, 332 Doweve", the sepa"ate pe"sonalit of the co"po"ation $a bedis"e!a"ded, o" the veil of co"po"ate fiction pie"ced when the co"po"ation is used :as acloak o" cove" fo" f"aud o" ille!alit, o" to wo"k an in%ustice, o" whe"e necessa" toachieve e9uit o" when necessa" fo" the p"otection of c"edito"s.: #ulo n! Baan, +nc.vs. A"aneta, +nc., (/ #CRA *5( H3(4I cited in Tan Boon Bee Co., +nc. vs.a"encio, supra= >este"n A!"o +ndust"ial Co"po"ation, et al. vs. Cou"t of Appeals, supra.
+n the instant case, the evidence clea"l shows that Chua and his i$$ediate fa$ilcont"ol A;EC1. The ?eed of E
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
15/29
These ci"cu$stances tend to show that the ?eed of E
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
16/29
di"ectin! the issuance of a w"it of eDERE&1RE, the cou"t finds the accused AF'#T+N P. #A;FA?1, R.,
!uilt beond "easonable doubt of the c"i$e of se"ious phsical in%u"ies,
defined and penali@ed unde" pa"a!"aph * A"ticle /4* of the Revised Penal
Code, and app"eciatin! in his favo" the followin! $iti!atin! ci"cu$stances
volunta" su""ende"= and
/ No intention to co$$it so !"ave a w"on! he"eb sentence sic said
accused to suffe" i$p"ison$ent fo" a pe"iod of fou" 5 $onths and twent
/2 das, with the accesso"ies p"ovided fo" b law, and to indemnif3 te
victim, Francisco 2uban, #r., in te sum of )15;,;,>>>.>> as dama-es for te
incapacit3 of Francisco 2uban to pursue and en-a-e in is poultr3
business.
#1 1R?ERE?. p. 3, Rollo
1n 1ctobe" (, 3)4, petitione" filed an application fo" p"obation with the t"ial cou"t. The
application was !"anted in an 1"de" dated Ap"il 8, 3)(. The o"de" contained, a$on!
othe"s, the followin! condition
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
17/29
petitione" filed di"ectl with this Cou"t a petition fo" "eview of the t"ial cou"t0s o"de"
!"antin! the $otion fo" issuance of a w"it of ee "efe""ed the petition to the
Cou"t of Appeals in a "esolution dated Ap"il *, 3)) p. ), Rollo.
1n Ma"ch 4, 3)3, "espondent Cou"t of Appeals "ende"ed a decision affi"$in! the
o"de" of the t"ial cou"t !"antin! the $otion fo" the issuance of a w"it of e. p. 2, Rollo
+n its decision affi"$in! the o"de" of the t"ial cou"t !"antin! p"ivate "espondent0s $otion
fo" the issuance of a w"it of e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
18/29
"ende"ed in a suitte mission of te court is limited to te e7ecution and
enforcement of te said final jud-ment in all of its parts and in accordance
wit its e7press orders.? The %ud!$ent in 9uestion is clea", and with the
a$ended w"it of ee do not believe, howeve", that the o"de" dated Ap"il 8, 3)( !"antin! the application
fo" p"obation and i$posin! so$e conditions the"ein alte"ed o" $odified the decision
dated 1ctobe" 4, 3)4. The Ap"il 8, 3)( 1"de" of the t"ial cou"t !"antin! the
application fo" p"obation and p"ovidin! as one of the conditions the"ein that petitione"
inde$nif p"ivate "espondent P/,222.22 $onthl du"in! the pe"iod of p"obation did not
inc"ease o" dec"ease the civil liabilit ad%ud!ed a!ainst petitione" but $e"el p"ovided
fo" the $anne" of pa$ent b the accused of his civil liabilit durin- te period of
probation.
+t is the sub$ission of p"ivate "espondent that in the case of Budlon- v
.Apaliso, No.
428, une /5, 3)*, // #CRA 3*8. >e al"ead "uled that :The 0conviction and
sentence0 clause of the statuto" definition clea"l si!nifies that probation affects onl3
te criminal aspect of te case.:
The p"onounce$ent inApaliso
that :p"obation affects onl the c"i$inal aspect of the
case: should not be !iven a lite"al $eanin!. +nte"p"etin! the ph"ase within the conte
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
19/29
+n the case of Florentino 2. Bacla3on v. 9on. )acito G. 'utia, et al
., F.R. No. 83/3),
Ap"il *2, 3)5, /3 #CRA 5), >e "uled that the conditions listed unde" #ection 2 of
the P"obation ;aw a"e not e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
20/29
385= Also / '.#. ?ept. of ustice, Atto"ne Fene"al0s #u"ve of Release
P"ocedu"es *) 3*3 cited in The Pe"iod and Conditions of P"obation b
#e"!io &. Fo, +BP ou"nal #pecial +ssue on P"obation, ol. 8, No. 8, pp.
524-5/2. E$phasis ou"s
The t"ial cou"t is !iven the disc"etion to i$pose conditions in the o"de" !"antin!
p"obation :as it $a dee$ best.: As al"ead stated, it is not onl li$ited to those listed
unde" #ection 2 of the P"obation ;aw. Thus, unde" #ection /4, pa"a!"aph d of the
Rules on P"obation Methods and P"ocedu"es, a$on! the conditions which $a be
i$posed in the o"de" !"antin! p"obation is
#ec. /4. 1the" conditions of P"obation. The P"obation 1"de" $a also
"e9ui"e the p"obatione" in app"op"iate cases, to
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
21/29
Sere O7!7o!
CRU4, J., concu""in!
+ concu" in the "esult, the issue havin! beco$e $oot and acade$ic. At the sa$e ti$e,
howeve", + $ust e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
22/29
G.R. No. 1*2+1 Ar7= , 2&&
C#INA BANING CORPORATION,petitione",
vs.
ASIAN CONSTRUCTION !" E$ELOPMENT CORPORATION,"espondent.
E C I S I O N
AUSTRIA-MARTINE4, J.>
Befo"e the Cou"t is a Petition fo" Review on "ertiorari unde" Rule 58 of the Rules of
Cou"t filed b petitione" China Bankin! Co"po"ation China Bank seekin! to annul the
Resolutiondated 1ctobe" 5, /22/ and the Resolution/dated Ma 4, /22* of the
Cou"t of Appeals CA in CA-F.R. C No. (/(8.
The facts of the case
1n ul /5, 334, China Bank !"anted "espondent Asian Const"uction and ?evelop$ent
Co"po"ation AC?C an 1$nibus C"edit ;ine in the a$ount of P32,222,222.22.*
1n Ap"il /, 333, alle!in! that AC?C failed to co$pl with its obli!ations unde" the
1$nibus C"edit ;ine, China Bank filed a Co$plaint5fo" "ecove" of su$ of $one and
da$a!es with p"ae" fo" the issuance of w"it of p"eli$ina" attach$ent befo"e the
Re!ional T"ial Cou"t RTC of Makati, B"anch *), docketed as Civil Case No. 33-(34.
+n the Co$plaint, China Bank clai$ed that AC?C, afte" collectin! and "eceivin! the
p"oceeds o" "eceivables f"o$ the va"ious const"uction cont"acts and pu"po"tedl holdin!
the$ in t"ust fo" China Bank unde" seve"al ?eeds of Assi!n$ent, $isapp"op"iated,
conve"ted, and used the funds fo" its own pu"pose and benefit, instead of "e$ittin! o"
delive"in! the$ to China Bank.8
1n Ap"il //, 333, the RTC issued an 1"de"4!"antin! China Banks p"ae" fo" w"it of
p"eli$ina" attach$ent. Conse9uentl, as shown in the #he"iffs Repo"t(dated une 5,
333, the w"it of p"eli$ina" attach$ent was i$ple$ented levin! pe"sonal p"ope"ties of
AC?C, i.e., vans, du$p t"ucks, ce$ent $i
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
23/29
1n une 8, /222, China Bank filed a Motion to Take Custod of Attached P"ope"ties
with Motion fo" F"ant of Autho"it to #ell to the B"anch #he"iff2with the RTC, p"ain!
that it be allowed to take custod of AC?Cs p"ope"ties fo" the pu"pose of sellin! the$ in
an auction.1n une /2, /222, AC?C filed its 1pposition/to the une 8, /222 Motion
a"!uin! that the"e can be no sale of the latte"s attached p"ope"ties in the absence of a
final and e
7/25/2019 Cases for June 30, 2016 Atty. Pancho
24/29
< <