Scribd
Upload
64 views2 pages

Facts:: Indiviso To Pedro de La Cruz While The Other 50% Was Adjudicated Pro-Indiviso To The

This case involved a dispute over leasehold rights to a portion of land in Laoang, Northern Samar. The land was originally leased by Pedro de la Cruz from the Bureau of Lands. After Pedro's wife died, the leasehold rights were split between Pedro and his children. Over time, the children and one child's heir sold their portions of the leasehold rights to different parties. The plaintiff, Isidro Saba, purchased the 1/8 leasehold rights of Lourdes Agbayani. Saba then demanded that the leaseholders on the property, the private respondents, pay rent to him instead of Agbayani. When the private respondents refused, Saba filed a collection case against

Uploaded by

MariaHannahKristenRamirez
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
64 views2 pages

Facts:: Indiviso To Pedro de La Cruz While The Other 50% Was Adjudicated Pro-Indiviso To The

This case involved a dispute over leasehold rights to a portion of land in Laoang, Northern Samar. The land was originally leased by Pedro de la Cruz from the Bureau of Lands. After Pedro's wife died, the leasehold rights were split between Pedro and his children. Over time, the children and one child's heir sold their portions of the leasehold rights to different parties. The plaintiff, Isidro Saba, purchased the 1/8 leasehold rights of Lourdes Agbayani. Saba then demanded that the leaseholders on the property, the private respondents, pay rent to him instead of Agbayani. When the private respondents refused, Saba filed a collection case against

Uploaded by

MariaHannahKristenRamirez
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/ 2

SABA V.

CA
G.R. No. 77950 August 24, 1990

FACTS:
Pedro de la Cruz is a grantee of a lease of a portion of land in Laoang, Northern
Samar awarded to him by the Bureau of Lands. The award of lease was not presented in
court but its existence was not disputed by the parties. In 1939 ,wife of Pedro de la Cruz,
died and the estate became the subject of an intestate estate proceeding The leasehold
was included in this special proceeding wherein 50% thereof was adjudicated pro-
indiviso to Pedro de la Cruz while the other 50% was adjudicated pro-indiviso to the
children, namely: Jesus, Alfredo, Lourdes, Amada, Josefa, Genaro, Eufemio and Ramon,
all surnamed de la Cruz.

In 1953, private respondent Jose Ongchuan leased the warehouse from Pedro de
la Cruz. In 1959 or so, the seven children of Pedro de la Cruz, sold their leasehold rights
(7/8 of the 50% of MLA 810) to private respondent Emil Ong, while Lourdes C.
Agbayani sold her leasehold right (118) pro-indiviso to petitioner Isidro V. Saba
Later, Lourdes C. Agbayani sent a letter to private respondents notifying them of
the sale of her 1/8 share in the leasehold to petitioner and requested that payment of
rentals be given to the new owner instead of her. Private respondents did not heed the
request. Petitioner reiterated the demand of Lourdes C. Agbayani several times yet
private respondents ignored said demand. Thus, petitioner was forced to file a case for
collection of rentals against private respondents

On the other hand, private respondents prayed for moral and exemplary
damages as well as attorney's fees. They contended that the complaint is baseless and
intended to harass them. Because of this complaint, private respondent Emil Ong's
reputation as a businessman, CPA, lawyer and a convention delegate of Northern
Samar was tarnished and he was exposed to ridicule. Private respondent Jose
Ongchuan contended that his reputation as a respected businessman in the community
was likewise affected.
the trial court rendered judgment against petitioner, ordering plaintiff to pay to
defendants jointly and severally, P40,000.00 as moral damages; P30,000.00 as exemplary
damages and P15,000.00 as attorney's fees. With costs against plaintiff.
ISSUE:
Whether the award of damages is proper.

RULING:
No. Moral damages may be awarded to compensate one for diverse injuries such
as mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings and social humiliation. It
is however not enough that such injuries have arisen; it is essential that they have
sprung from a wrongful  act or omission, fraud, malice, or bad faith which was the
proximate cause.
Petitioner was in good faith when he filed the collection suit against private
respondents. He thought that by virtue of the sale of Lourdes C. Agbayani's leasehold
right to him, her right to 1/8 pro-indiviso of the property has already been transferred to
him, which includes the right to collect rentals. Lourdes C. Agbayani even notified the
private respondents that the property being rented by them has been sold to petitioner
The failure by private respondents to pay the rentals prompted petitioner to file a
complaint against them. A person may have erred but error alone is not a ground for
moral damages

ACCORDINGLY, the petition is hereby PARTLY GRANTED. The decision of the


respondent Court of Appeals is MODIFIED insofar as the award of moral damages,
exemplary damages and attorney's fees is concerned, which is DELETED.

You might also like