Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 5 views

    Spouses MARIANO Z

    Uploaded by

    A. Magno

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Spouses MARIANO Z

    Uploaded by

    A. Magno
    5 views3 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    5 views3 pages

    Spouses MARIANO Z

    Uploaded by

    A. Magno

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    Spouses MARIANO Z. VELARDE and AVELINA D.

    VELARDE,
    petitioners,
    vs.
    COURT OF APPEALS, DAVID A. RAYMUNDO and GEORGE
    RAYMUNDO, respondents.
    G.R. No. 108346. July 11, 2001

    FACTS:

    1. Petitioner's/Plaintiff's claim/s:
    Petitioners filed on February 9, 1987, a Complaint against private
    respondents for specific performance, nullity of cancellation, writ of
    possession, and damages (Civil Case No. 15952 at the Regional Trial
    Court of Makati, Branch 149). They averred that the Court of appeals erred
    in (1) holding that the non-payment of the mortgage obligation resulted in a
    breach of the contract, (2) in holding that the rescission (resolution) of the
    contract by private respondents was justified, (3) in holding that petitioners'
    January 7, 1987, letter gave three 'new conditions' constituting mere offers
    or an attempt to novate necessitating a new agreement between the
    parties.

    2. Respondent's/Defendant's claim/s:
    Respondent sent plaintiffs a notarial notice of cancellation/rescission of
    the intended sale of the subject property allegedly due to the latter's failure
    to comply with the terms and conditions of the Deed of Sale with
    Assumption of Mortgage and the Undertaking (Exh. '5', pp. 225-226,
    Record). 
    3. Decisions of the lower courts:
    The case was tried and heard and dismissed the Complaint of the
    petitioners in a Decision dated November 14, 1990. 7 Thereafter, petitioners
    filed a Motion for Reconsideration. In an order dated May 15, 1991, Judge
    Abad Santos granted the petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration and
    instructed petitioners to pay the balance of P1.8 million to private
    respondents who, in turn, were ordered to execute a deed of absolute sale
    and to surrender possession of the disputed property to petitioners.

    ISSUE/S:

    Whether or not, the contract is breached, and the defendant has the
    right to rescind the contract.

    HELD:

    1. Disposition of the case:


    The assailed Decision is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION
    that private respondents are ordered to return to petitioners the amount of
    P874,150, which the latter paid as a consequence of the rescinded
    contract, with legal interest thereon from January 8, 1987, the date of
    rescission. No pronouncement as to costs.

    2. Dictum:
    As stipulated in the contract, non-payment of the mortgage obligation
    would result in a violation of the contract. Upon petitioners’ failure to pay
    the agreed price, respondent Raymundo may choose either of two (2)
    actions - (1) demand fulfillment of the contract, or (2) demand its
    rescission (Article 1191, Civil Code). Misplaced is petitioners' reliance on
    the cases they cited because the factual circumstances in those cases are
    not analogous to those in the present one - in Song Fo there was, on the
    part of the buyer, only a delay of twenty (20) days to pay for the goods
    delivered. Moreover, the buyer's offer to pay was unconditional and was
    accepted by the seller. While in Zepeda, the breach involved a mere one-
    week delay in paying the balance of 1,000 which was actually paid.
    Furthermore, in Tan, the alleged breach was private respondent's delay of
    only a few days, which was for the purpose of clearing the title to the
    property; there was no reference whatsoever to the nonpayment of the
    contract price.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy