manzano vs perez digest

8/9/2019 Manzano vs Perez Digest

1/4

EMILIA MANZANO

vs.

MIGUEL PEREZ SR., LEONCIO PEREZ, MACARIO PEREZ,FLORENCIO PEREZ,

NESTOR PEREZ, MIGUEL PEREZ JR. and GLORIA PEREZ

Commodatum (The Ba!o"#Fa$t%&

Petitioner Emilia Manzano alleged that she is the owner of a residential house and

lot situated at General Luna St. Laguna. In 1979, ieves Manzano, sister of the

!etitioner "orrowed the aforementioned !ro!ert# as $ollateral for a !ro%e$ted loan.

Pursuant to their understanding, the !etitioner e&e$uted two deeds of $onve#an$e

for the sale of the residential lot and the house ere$ted, "oth for a $onsideration of

P1.'' !lus other valua"les allegedl# re$eived "# her from ieves Manzano. ieves

Manzano, together with her hus"and, res!ondent Miguel Perez, Sr. o"tained a loanfromthe (ural )an* of Infanta, In$. in the sum of P+','''.''. o se$ure !a#ment of

their inde"tedness, the# e&e$uted a (eal Estate Mortgage over the su"%e$t !ro!ert#

in favor of the "an*. ieves Manzano died on 1- e$em"er 1979 leaving her

hus"and and $hildren as heirs. hese heirs refused to return the su"%e$t !ro!ert# to

the !etitioner even after the !a#ment of their loan with the (ural )an*. he

!etitioner sought the annulment of the deeds of sale and e&e$ution of a deed of

transfer or re$onve#an$e of the su"%e$t !ro!ert# in her favor, and award of

damages. he /ourt of 0!!eals ruled that it was not $onvin$ed "# !etitioners $laim

that there was a su!!osed oral agreement of $ommodatum over the dis!uted house

and lot. 2en$e, this !etition.

Contenton o' ettone"

he !etitioner alleged that !ro!erties in 3uestion after the# have "een transferred

to ieves Manzano, were mortgaged in favor of the (ural )an* of Infanta, In$ to

se$ure !a#ment of the loan. he do$uments $overing said !ro!erties whi$h were

given to the "an* as $ollateral of said loan, u!on !a#ment and release to the

!rivate res!ondents, were returned to !etitioner "# 4loren$io Perez. hese are a

$lear re$ognition "# res!ondents that !etitioner is the owner of the !ro!erties in

3uestion

Contenton o' "e%ondent%

the res!ondents $ountered that the# are the owners of the !ro!ert# in 3uestion

"eing the legal heirs of ieves Manzano who !ur$hased the same from the

!etitioner for value and in good faith, as shown "# the deeds of sale whi$h $ontain

the true agreements "etween the !arties therein that e&$e!t for the !etitioners

"are allegations, she failed to show an# !roof that the transa$tion she entered into

with her sister was a loan and not a sale.


2/4

Re%o!uton&

he $ourt ruled that !etitioner has !resented no $onvin$ing !roof of her $ontinued

ownershi! of the su"%e$t !ro!ert#. In addition to her own oral testimon#, she

su"mitted !roof of !a#ment of real !ro!ert# ta&es, "ut su$h !a#ment was made

onl# after her /om!laint had alread# "een lodged "efore the trial $ourt. either $an

the $ourt give weight to her allegation that res!ondents !ossession of the su"%e$t

!ro!ert# was merel# "# virtue of her toleran$e. 5ral testimon# $annot, as a rule,

!revail over a written agreement of the !arties. In order to $ontradi$t the fa$ts

$ontained in a notarial do$ument, su$h as the two 6Kasulatan ng Bilihang

Tuluyanin this $ase, as well as the !resum!tion of regularit# in the e&e$ution

thereof, there must "e $lear and $onvin$ing eviden$e that is more than merel#

!re!onderant. 2ere !etitioner has failed to $ome u! with even a !re!onderan$e of

eviden$e to !rove her $laim.

/ourts are not "lessed with the a"ilit# to read what goes on in the minds of

!eo!le. hat is wh# !arties to a $ase are given all the o!!ortunit# to !resent

eviden$e to hel! the $ourts de$ide on who are telling the truth and who are l#ing,

who are entitled to their $laim and who are not. he Su!reme /ourt $annot de!art

from these guidelines and de$ide on the "asis of $om!assion alone "e$ause, aside

from "eing $ontrar# to the rule of law and our %udi$ial s#stem, this $ourse of a$tion

would ultimatel# lead to anar$h#.

e reiterate, the eviden$e o8ered "# !etitioner to !rove her $laim is sadl#

la$*ing. uris!ruden$e on the su"%e$t matter, when a!!lied thereto, !oints to the

e&isten$e of a sale, not a commodatum over thesu"%e$t house and lot.

)*EREFORE, the Petition is here"# EIE and the assailed e$ision

044I(ME. /osts against !etitioner.


3/4


4/4

manzano vs perez digest

Documents