peralta v. quimpo

Upload: migz-dimayacyac

Post on 10-Oct-2015

45 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

antichresis

TRANSCRIPT

Peralta v. Quimpo51 O.G. 1383

Facts: Cristeta and Estrella ceded by way of antichresis their house and lot, for their own and in behalf of their sisters Consuelo and Isidra, to Bernardina Enriquez for the amount of P650. This was allegedly done for their financial needs and to send Consuelo to school. However, this was not paid. During the intestate proceedings of Bernardina, in which Casia, her sister was declared as administratrix, the court ordered the debtors to deliver the sum of P650 as payment of the loan as referred in the deed of antichresis. This did not happen. The court then ordered the forfeiture of the house and lot to Casia. After the war, Casia filed a claim with the War Damages Commission in spite of the fact that during the war, Casia sold the same house and lot by way of conditional sale or pacto de retro to Atty. Ludovico Peralta for P300, then adjusted to P800 since Casia was having a hard time financially because of the war. Now, Peralta leased out a portion of the lot to Tam Seng for a toilet, and later on allowed to extend the roof of his bakery. It just so happens that Consuelo, Estrella, and Isidra claim ownership over the parcel of land since they have an OCT under their name. Moreover, Fortunato Quimpo is also claiming ownership of the parcel of land since he fenced the western and southern sides of the property. Now, Atty. Peralta filed a case in court to be declared as the lawful owner of that parcel of land with a house of strong materials built thereon.Issue: W/N Peralta is the owner of the subject property.Held: Peralta has no rights since his predecessor has no rights as well. It is a fact that antichresis can only be constituted over an immovable, and if the debtor fails to pay, the antichretic creditor has the right to apply the fruits of that immovable to the interest, if any, and thereafter, to the principal. There is no provision under the law on antichresis that allows the outright forfeiture of the property under the burden of antichresis should the debtor fail to pay his debt.