Iringan v. CA, 366 SCRA 41 (2001)

G.R. No.
129107 September 26, 2001
ALFONSO L. IRINGAN, petitioner,
vs.
HON. COURT OF APPEALS and ANTONIO PALAO, represented by his
Attorney-in-Fact, FELISA P. DELOS SANTOS, respondents.
QUISUMBING, J.:
Doctrine:
Clearly, a judicial or notarial act is necessary before a valid rescission can take place,
whether or not automatic rescission has been stipulated. It is to be noted that the law
uses the phrase "even though"20 emphasizing that when no stipulation is found on
automatic rescission, the judicial or notarial requirement still applies
Facts:
On March 22, 1985, private respondent Antonio Palao sold to petitioner Alfonso
Iringan, an undivided portion of Lot No. 992 of the Tuguegarao Cadastre, located at
the Poblacion of Tuguegarao and covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. T-5790.
The parties executed a
Deed of Sale[2] on the same date with the purchase price of P295,000.00,... When the
second payment was due, Iringan paid only P40,000. Thus, on July 18, 1985, Palao
sent a letter[4] to Iringan stating that he considered the contract as rescinded and that
he would not accept any further payment considering that Iringan failed... to comply
with his obligation to pay the full amount of the second installment.
On February 21, 1989, Iringan, now represented by a new counsel - Atty. Carmelo Z.
Lasam, proposed that the P50,000 which he had already paid Palao be reimbursed[8]
or Palao could sell to Iringan, an equivalent portion of the land.
In a Decision[12] dated September 25, 1992, the Regional Trial Court of Cagayan,
Branch I, ruled in favor of Palao and affirmed the rescission of the contra
(d) Ordering the defendants to pay jointly and severally the sum of P100,000.00 as
reasonable compensation for use of the property minus 50% of the amount paid by
them; and to pay P50,000.00 as moral damages; P10,000.00 as exemplary damages;
and P50,000.00 as attorney's fee; and... to pay the costs of suit.
Issues:
(1) whether or not the contract of sale was validly rescinded, and (2) whether or not
the award of moral and exemplary damages is proper
Ruling:
On the issue of moral and exemplary damages, petitioner claims that the Court of
Appeals erred in finding bad faith on his part when he resisted the rescission[38] and
claimed he was ready to pay but never actually paid respondent, notwithstanding
that he... knew that appellee's principal motivation for selling the lot was to raise
money to pay his SSS loan.[39] Petitioner would have us reverse the said CA findings
based on the exception[40] that these findings were made on a... misapprehension of
facts.
The records do not support petitioner's claims. First, per the records, petitioner
knew respondent's reason for selling his property. As testified to by petitioner[41]
and in the deposition[42] of respondent, such... fact was made known to petitioner
during their negotiations as well as in the letters sent to petitioner by Palao.[43]
Second, petitioner adamantly refused to formally execute an instrument showing
their mutual agreement to rescind the contract of... sale, notwithstanding that it was
petitioner who plainly breached the terms of their contract when he did not pay the
stipulated price on time, leaving private respondent desperate to find other sources
of funds to pay off his loan. Lastly, petitioner did not... substantiate by clear and
convincing proof, his allegation that he was ready and willing to pay respondent.
We are more inclined to believe his claim of readiness to pay was an afterthought
intended to evade the consequence of his breach. There is no record to show... the
existence of such amount, which could have been reflected, at the very least, in a
bank account in his name, if indeed one existed; or, alternatively, the proper deposit
made in court which could serve as a formal tender of payment.[44] Thus, we find...
the award of moral and exemplary damages proper.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The assailed decision dated April 30, 1997 of
the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. CV No. 39949, affirming the Regional Trial Court
decision and deleting the award of attorney's fees, is hereby AFFIRMED. Costs...
against the petitioner.

Iringan v. CA, 366 SCRA 41 (2001)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iringan v. CA, 366 SCRA 41 (2001)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Iringan v. CA, 366 SCRA 41 (2001)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No.

129107 September 26, 2001

You might also like