Scribd
Upload
47 views4 pages

Santos Vs Bernabe

This case involves a dispute over ownership of palay (rice) between Urbanos Santos and Pablo Tiongson that was mixed together after being deposited with Jose C. Bernabe. Santos deposited 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay, while Tiongson deposited 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos. When Tiongson sued Bernabe to recover the palay, only 924 cavans and 31 1/2 kilos were found. The court ruled that since the palay was mixed and could not be separated, each owner is entitled to a proportional share under Article 381 of the Civil Code. The court then modified the judgment to order Tiongson to pay Santos the value of

Uploaded by

Maria Michelle Moraca
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
47 views4 pages

Santos Vs Bernabe

This case involves a dispute over ownership of palay (rice) between Urbanos Santos and Pablo Tiongson that was mixed together after being deposited with Jose C. Bernabe. Santos deposited 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay, while Tiongson deposited 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos. When Tiongson sued Bernabe to recover the palay, only 924 cavans and 31 1/2 kilos were found. The court ruled that since the palay was mixed and could not be separated, each owner is entitled to a proportional share under Article 381 of the Civil Code. The court then modified the judgment to order Tiongson to pay Santos the value of

Uploaded by

Maria Michelle Moraca
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

URBANO SANTOS, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSE C. BERNABE, ET


AL., Defendants. PABLO TIONGSON and THE PROVINCIAL
SHERIFF OF BULACAN, Appellants.

Arcadio Ejercito and Guevara, Francisco & Recto, for Appellants.

Eusebio Orense and Nicolas Belmonte, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS

1. MANUAL DELIVERY OF PERSONAL PROPERTY; LIBERAL


CONSTRUCTION OF PROVISIONS OF CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
PURSUANT TO SECTION 2 THEREOF. — Plaintiff S and defendant T
deposited some palay with defendant B. T sues B to recover his portion,
and succeeds in obtaining a preliminary attachment and subsequent
sale of B’s property, despite S’s third- party claim. The sacks of palay
bore no marks or signs to distinguish T’s from S’s. S now contends that
T cannot claim the palay attached and sold because in soliciting the
attachment, he impliedly admitted that the palay belonged to B. But,
giving section 262 of the Code of Civil Procedure a liberal construction,
in pursuance of section 2 thereof, the application for a preliminary
attachment of B’s property filed by T, was a claim for the delivery of
personal property deposited by him with the former.

2. MIXTURE OF TWO SIMILAR THINGS; PROPORTIONAL RIGHT OF


EACH OWNER. — There being no means, in the instant case, to
separate out of the palay attached and sold, the portion corresponding to
plaintiff S and that corresponding to defendant T, the rule prescribed in
article 381 of the Civil Code for cases of this nature must be applied.
Said rule is as follows: "If, by the will of their owners, two things of
identical or dissimilar nature are mixed, or if the mixture occurs
accidentally, if in the latter case the things cannot be separated without
injury, each owner shall acquire a right in the mixture proportionate to
the part belonging to him, according to the value of the things mixed or
commingled."

DECISION

VILLA-REAL, J.:
This appeal was taken by the defendants Pablo Tiongson and the
Provincial Sheriff of Bulacan from the judgment of the Court of First
Instance of said province, wherein said defendant Pablo Tiongson was
ordered to pay the plaintiff Urbano Santos the value of 778 cavans and
38 kilos of palay, at the rate of P3 per cavan, without special
pronouncement as to costs.

In support of their appeal, the appellants assign the following alleged


errors committed by the lower court in its judgment, to
wit:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"1. The court erred in holding that it has been proved that in the cavans
of palay attached by the herein defendant Pablo Tiongson from the
defendant Jose C. Bernabe were included those claimed by the plaintiff
in this cause.

"2. The court erred in ordering the defendant Pablo Tiongson to pay the
plaintiff the value of 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay, the refund of
which is claimed by said plaintiff.

"3. The court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for a new
trial."cralaw virtua1aw library

The following facts were conclusively proved at the trial:chanrob1es


virtual 1aw library

On March 20, 1928, there were deposited in Jose C. Bernabe’s


warehouse by the plaintiff Urbano Santos 778 cavans and 38 kilos of
palay and by Pablo Tiongson 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of the same
grain.

On said date, March 20, 1928, Pablo Tiongson filed with the Court of
First Instance of Bulacan a complaint against Jose C. Bernabe, to
recover from the latter the 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay deposited in
the defendant’s warehouse. At the same time, the application of Pablo
Tiongson for a writ of attachment was granted, and the attachable
property of Jose C. Bernabe, include 924 cavans and 31½ kilos of palay
found by the sheriff in his warehouse, were attached, sold at public
auction, and the proceeds thereof delivered to said defendant Pablo
Tiongson, who obtained judgment in said case.

The herein plaintiff, Urbano Santos, intervened in the attachment of the


palay, but upon Pablo Tiongson’s filing the proper bond, the sheriff
proceeded with the attachment, giving rise to the present complaint.

It does not appear that the sacks of palay of Urbano Santos and those of
Pablo Tiongson, deposited in Jose C. Bernabe’s warehouse, bore any
marks or signs, nor were they separated one from the other.

The plaintiff-appellee Urbano Santos contends that Pablo Tiongson


cannot claim the 924 cavans and 31½ kilos of palay attached by the
defendant sheriff as pat of those deposited by him in Jose C. Bernabe’s
warehouse, because, in asking for the attachment thereof, he impliedly
acknowledged that the same belonged to Jose C. Bernabe and not to
him.

In the complaint filed by Pablo Tiongson against Jose C. Bernabe, civil


case No. 3665 of the Court of First Instance of Bulacan, it is alleged that
said plaintiff deposited in the defendant’s warehouse 1,026 cavans and
9 kilos of palay, the return of which, or the value thereof, at the rate of
P3 per cavan was claimed therein. Upon filing said complaint, the
plaintiff applied for a preliminary writ of attachment of the defendant’s
property, which was accordingly issued, and the defendant’s property,
including the 924 cavans and 31 1/2 kilos of palay found by the sheriff in
his warehouse, were attached.

It will be seen that the action brought by Pablo Tiongson against Jose C.
Bernabe is that provided in section 262 of the Code of Civil Procedure
for the delivery of personal property. Although it is true that the plaintiff
and his attorney did not follow strictly the procedure provided in said
section for claiming the delivery of said personal property, nevertheless,
the procedure followed by him may be construed as equivalent thereto,
considering the provisions of section 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure to
the effect that "the provisions of this Code, and the proceedings under it,
shall be liberally construed, in the order to promote its object and assist
the parties in obtaining speedy justice."cralaw virtua1aw library

Liberally construing, therefore, the above cited provisions of section 262


of the Code of Civil Procedure, the writ of attachment applied for by
Pablo Tiongson against the property of Jose C. Bernabe may be
construed as a claim for the delivery of the sacks of palay deposited by
the former with the latter.

The 778 cavans and 38 kilos of palay belonging to the plaintiff Urbano
Santos, having been mixed with the 1,026 cavans and 9 kilos of palay
belonging to the defendant Pablo Tiongson in Jose C. Bernabe’s
warehouse; the sheriff having found only 924 cavans and 31½ kilos of
palay in said warehouse at the time of the attachment thereof; and there
being no means of separating from said 924 cavans and 31 1/2 kilos of
palay belonging to Urbano Santos and those belonging to Pablo
Tiongson, the following rules prescribed in article 381 of the Civil Code
for cases of this nature, is applicable:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"ART. 381. If, by the will of their owners, two things of identical or
dissimilar nature are mixed, or if the mixture occurs accidentally, if in the
latter case the things cannot be separated without injury, each owner
shall acquire a right in the mixture proportionate to the part belonging to
him, according to the value of the things mixed or commingled."cralaw
virtua1aw library

The number of kilos in a cavan not having been determined, we will take
the proportion only of the 924 cavans of palay which were attached and
sold, thereby giving Urbano Santos, who deposited 778 cavans, 398.49
thereof, and Pablo Tiongson, who deposited 1,026 cavans, 525.51, or
the value thereof at the rate of P3 per cavan.

Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is hereby modified, and Pablo


Tiongson is hereby ordered to pay the plaintiff Urbano Santos the value
of 398.49 cavans of palay at the rate of P3 a cavan, without special
pronouncement at to cost. So ordered.

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