Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-11754. April 29, 1960. ]

SATURNINO D. VILLORIA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HON. SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, ET AL., Defendants-Appellees.

Jesus N. Borromeo and Jesus R. Gabaya for Appellant.

Solicitor General Ambrosio Padilla and Solicitor Camilo D. Quiason for Appellees.


SYLLABUS


1. FRIAR LANDS; DIRECTOR OF LANDS NOT VESTED WITH POWER TO UNILATERALLY CANCEL SALE CERTIFICATE; AUTHORITY OF DIRECTOR TO BRING SUIT TO ENFORCE PAYMENT. — Under the Friar Lands Act the Director of Lands has no power to unilaterally cancel the sale certificate or contract for failure of the purchaser to pay subsequent installments. Section 17 of the said Act merely authorizes said director to "enforce payment of any past due installment and interest by bringing suit to recover the same with interest thereon, and also to enforce the lien of the Government against the land by selling the same in the manner provided by Act No. 190 for the foreclosure of mortgages."cralaw virtua1aw library

2. LACHES, DEFENSE OF; PRESUMPTION ON ONE WITH SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE TO LEAD HIM TO A FACT; EFFECT OF FAILURE TO ACT THEREON. — One having sufficient knowledge to lead him to a fact is deemed to be conversant therewith and chargeable with laches in failing to act thereon.

3. ID.; FOUR ELEMENTS. — The equitable defense of laches requires four elements: (1) conduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under whom he claims, giving rise to the situation of which complaint is made and for which the complaint seeks a remedy; (2) delay in asserting the complainant’s rights, the complainant having had knowledge or notice of the defendant’s conduct and having been afforded an opportunity to institute a suit; (3) lack of knowledge or notice on the part of the defendant that the complainant would assert the right on which he bases his suit; and (4) injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to the complainant, or the suit is not held to be barred.


D E C I S I O N


GUTIERREZ DAVID, J.:


Direct appeal to this Court from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Ceb
Top of Page