Lorenzo and Socorro Velasco v. CA and Magdalena Estate Inc.

had considered the offer to sell rescinded on account of her failure Subsequent to the said donation, Ong and father, Melquiades
[June 29, 1973] (digest) to complete the down payment on or before December 31, 1962. Barraca approached Formaran to borrow one-half of the land
donated to her so the Ong could obtain a loan from a bank to buy a
Facts: Issue: dental chair. An absolute deed of sale was executed without
Whether the talks between the Magdalena Estate, Inc. and Lorenzo monetary consideration.
This is a suit for specific performance filed by Lorenzo Velasco Velasco ever ripened into a consummated sale?
against the Magdalena Estate, Inc. More or less 30 years after the said deed of sale was executed, Ong
Held: NO filed a complaint for unlawful detainer before the Municipal Circuit
On Nov 29, 1962 the plaintiff and the defendant had entered into a Trial Court of Ibajay-Nabas, IBajay, Aklan against Formaran ordering
CONTRACT OF SALE of land (2,059 sq m) at for P100,000.00. the Ratio: the latter to vacate the land sold to the former. The court rendered a
terms of payment were as follows: down payment: P10,000.00 and The material averments contained in the petitioners' complaint decision in favor of Ong and ordered Formaran to vacate the land in
P20,000.00 and the remaining P70,000.00 would be paid in disclose a lack of complete "agreement in regard to the manner of question.
instalments, an equal monthly amortization will be determined as payment" of the lot in question. The complaint states pertinently:
soon as the P30,000.00 DP had been completed. Petitioner, Formaran filed an action for the annulment of the deed of
That plaintiff and defendant further agreed that the total down absolute sale against Respondent, Ong in the RTC of Kalibo, Aklan.
Plaintiff paid P10,000.00 on November 29, 1962. On Jan 8, 1964 he payment shall by P30,000.00, including the P10,000.00 partial And rendered a decision in favor of Formaran.
tendered the payment of P20,000.00 however defendant refused to payment mentioned in paragraph 3 hereof, and that upon
accept and refused to execute a formal deed of sale. completion of the said down payment of P30,000.00, the balance of Respondent coursed an appeal to the CA and CA reversed and set
P70,000.00 shall be said by the plaintiff to the defendant in 10 years aside the decision of the RTC and ordered petitioner to vacate the
Socorro Velasco is his sister-in-law and that he had requested her to from November 29, 1962; land.
make the necessary contacts referring to the purchase of the
property because he does not understand English well. That the time within the full down payment of the P30,000.00 was Hence this present petiotion
to be completed was not specified by the parties but the defendant
The receipt states: "Earnest money for the purchase of Lot 15, Block was duly compensated during the said time prior to completion of Issue:
7, Psd-6129, Area 2,059 square meters including improvements the down payment of P30,000.00 by way of lease rentals on the WON the absolute deed of sale is valid
thereon — P10,000.00." At the bottom of Exhibit A the following house existing thereon which was earlier leased by defendant to the
appears: "Agreed price: P100,000.00, P30,000.00 down payment, plaintiff's sister-in-law, Socorro J. Velasco, and which were duly paid Held: NO
bal. in 10 years." to the defendant by checks drawn by plaintiff.
Ruling:
On the other hand, defendant alleged that there was no contract of Petitioners admit that they still had to meet and agree on how and The Court believes and so holds that the subject Deed of Sale is
sale that was perfected because the minds of the parties did not when the down-payment and the installment payments were to be indeed simulated,2 as it is: (1) totally devoid of consideration; (2) it
meet "in regard to the manner of payment.” Contract is paid. was executed on August 12, 1967, less than two months from the
unenforceable under the Statute of Frauds. time the subject land was donated to petitioner on June 25, 1967 by
Such being the situation, it cannot be said that a definite and firm no less than the parents of respondent Glenda Ong; (3) on May 18,
The property was leased by Socorro Velasco and that the defendant sales agreement between the parties had been perfected over the lot 1978, petitioner mortgaged the land to the Aklan Development Bank
indicated its willingness to sell the property for P100,000.00, with in question. for a ₱23,000.00 loan; (4) from the time of the alleged sale,
the following terms of payment: downpayment of P30,000.00, petitioner has been in actual possession of the subject land; (5) the
P20,000.00 of which was to be paid on November 31, 1962 and the Indeed, this Court has already ruled before that a definite agreement alleged sale was registered on May 25, 1991 or about twenty four
P70,000.00 including interest a 9% per annum was to be paid on on the manner of payment of the purchase price is an essential (24) years after execution; (6) respondent Glenda Ong never
installments for a period of ten years at the rate of P5,381.32 on element in the formation of a binding and enforceable contract of introduced any improvement on the subject land; and (7)
June 30 and December of every year until the same shall have been sale. petitioner’s house stood on a part of the subject land. These are facts
fully paid; and circumstances which may be considered badges of bad faith that
G.R. No. 186264               July 8, 2013 tip the balance in favor of petitioner.
On November 29, 1962 Socorro Velasco offered to pay P10,000.00 as DR. LORNA C. FORMARAN, Petitioner, vs. DR. GLENDA B. ONG
initial payment instead of the agreed P20,000.00 but because the AND SOLOMON S. ONG, Respondents. "The amplitude of foregoing undisputed facts and circumstances
amount was short of the alleged P20,000.00 the same was accepted clearly shows that the sale of the land in question was purely
merely as deposited and upon request of Socorro Velasco the receipt Facts: simulated. It is void from the very beginning (Article 1346, New Civil
was made in the name of her brother-in-law the plaintiff herein; Code). If the sale was legitimate, defendant Glenda should have
Formaran received by way of donation by his uncle and aunt, Sps. immediately taken possession of the land, declared in her name for
Socorro Velasco failed to complete the down payment of P30,000.00 Melquiades Barraca and Praxedes Casidsid a parcel of land situated taxation purposes, registered the sale, paid realty taxes, introduced
and neither has she paid any installments on the balance of in Nabas, Aklan. improvements therein and should not have allowed plaintiff to
P70,000.00 up to the present time; mortgage the land. These omissions properly militated against
From the time of donation until present, Formaran was in actual defendant Glenda’s submission that the sale was legitimate and the
On January 8, 1964 that Socorro Velasco tendered payment of possession of the land consideration was paid.
P20,000.00, which offer the defendant refused to accept because it
While the Deed of Absolute Sale was notarized, it cannot justify the pulling out a unit of Philippine Nissan 1.6 cc Sentry Automatic Issues:
conclusion that the sale is a true conveyance to which the parties are (Flamingo red), defendant obliged itself to sell to plaintiffs a
irrevocably and undeniably bound. Although the notarization of determinate thing for a price certain in money which was 1. Was the contract of sale valid?
Deed of Absolute Sale, vests in its favor the presumption of P494,000.00". 4 2. Is a public document needed for transfer of ownership?
regularity, it does not validate nor make binding an instrument
never intended, in the first place, to have any binding legal effect Resultingly, petition committed a breach of contract when it allowed Held:
upon the parties thereto (Suntay vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. the unit in question to be sold to another buyer to the prejudice of
114950, December 19, 1995; cited in Ruperto Viloria vs. Court of private respondents. 1. Yes. People who witnessed the execution of the deed positively
Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 119974, June 30, 1999)." testified on its authenticity. They stated that it had been executed
The Court of Appeals gave complete accord to the aforementioned and signed by the signatories. A contract of sale is a consensual
G.R. No. 121559 June 18, 1998 findings and affirmed the same in its, decision. 5 In this regard, it contract, which means that the sale is perfected by mere consent. No
XENTREX AUTOMOTIVE, INC., petitioner, vs. COURT OF must be emphasized that the prevailing rule is that the findings of particular form is required for its validity. Upon perfection of the
APPEALS, MACARTHUR M. SAMSON and GERTRUDES C. SAMSON, fact of the trial court, particularly when affirmed by the Court of contract, the parties may reciprocally demand performance (NCC
respondents. Appeals, are binding upon this Court. 6 1475, NCC), i.e., the vendee may compel transfer of ownership of the
object of the sale, and the vendor may require the vendee to pay the
FACTS: thing sold (NCC 1458).
Petitioner is a dealer of motor vehicles. On October 25, 1991, private Nevertheless, We sustain the award of moral damages considering
respondents went to petitioner to purchase a brand new car, a 1991 private respondent Macarthur Samson's testimony that he suffered 2. No. The provision of NCC 1358 of NCC on the necessity of a public
Nissan Sentra Super Saloon A/T model, valued at P494,000.00. from shock and embarrassment as a result of petitioner's failure to document is only for convenience, not for validity or enforceability.
Private respondents made an initial deposit of P50,000.00; comply with its obligation. The trial court thus rightly and legally ordered Dalion to deliver to
petitioner issued the corresponding official receipt (O.R. NO. 6504). Sabesaje the parcel of land and to execute corresponding formal
The balance was to be paid thru bank financing. Pending the Spouses Dalion v. CA deed of conveyance in a public document. Under NCC 1498, when
processing of their application for financing, private respondents GR. No. 78903 February 28,1990 the sale is made through a public instrument, the execution is
paid an additional P200,000.00 to petitioner which was covered by equivalent to the delivery of the thing. Delivery may either be actual
another receipt (O.R. NO. 6547). Eventually, due to the slow pace in Facts: (real) or constructive. Thus delivery of a parcel of land may be done
the processing of their application for financing, private respondents by placing the vendee in control and possession of the land (real) or
decided to pay the remaining balance on November 6, 1991 by A land in Southern Leyte was declared in the name of Segundo by embodying the sale in a public instrument (constructive).
tendering a check in the amount of P250,000.00. As it turned out Dalion. Sabesaje sued to recover ownership this land based on a
however, to private respondents' shock and disappointment, the car private document of absolute sale, allegedly executed by Segundo
had already been sold to another buyer without their knowledge, Dalion.
prompting them to send a demand letter to petitioner asking the
latter to comply with its obligation to deliver the car. Their demand Dalion, however, denied the sale, saying that:
unheeded, private respondents (plaintiffs below) filed a suit for ● The document was fictitious
breach of contract and damages before the Regional Trial Court of ● His signature was a forgery, and
Dagupan City, Branch 42. Denying any liability, petitioner (defendant ● That the land is conjugal property, which he and his wife
below) alleged that the complaint stated no cause of action. After acquired in 1960 from Saturnina Sabesaje as evidenced
trial, judgment was rendered by the trial court in private by the "Escritura de Venta Absoluta."
respondents' favor. On appeal by petitioner, the Court of Appeals
affirmed the decision of the trial court. 2 The spouses denied the claims of Sabesaje that after executing a
deed of sale over the parcel of land, they had pleaded with Sabesaje
ISSUE: WON THERE WAS A PERFECTED CONTRACT BETWEEN THE to be allowed to administer the land because Dalion did not have
PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENT. livelihood.

HELD: YES Spouses Dalion admitted, however, administering 5 parcels of land

RULING: in Southern Leyte, which belonged to Leonardo Sabesaje,
Petitioner argues that there was no perfected contract of sale grandfather of Sabesaje, who died in 1956.
between the parties due to private respondents' failure to comply
with their obligation to pay the purchase price of the car in full. The Dalions never received their agreed 10% and 15% commission
Thus, petitioner assert that it has no obligation to deliver the car to on the sales of copra and abaca. Sabesaje's suit, they say, was
private respondents and therefore could not be held liable for intended merely to harass and forestall Dalion's threat to sue for
breach of contract and damages these unpaid commissions.

Undoubtedly, there was a perfected contract of sale between the Trial Court decided in favor of Sabesaje and ordered the Dalions to
petitioner and private respondents as confirmed by the trial court deliver the parcel of land in a public document. CA affirmed.
when it found that "[b] y accepting a deposit of P50,000.00 and by