Home of ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 42185. September 10, 1935. ]

QUINTIN DE BORJA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. JOSE DE BORJA, Defendant-Appellant.

M. H. de Joya, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Benedicto M. Javier, Jose de Borja and Guillermo B. Guevara for dependant-appellant.

SYLLABUS


COURTS; SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS; SUBMISSION OF CASES TO THE DIFFERENT DIVISIONS OF THE COURT; EJECTMENT. — Act No. 4023 provides that in order to attain an equal distribution of cases between the different divisions, whether of five judges or three judges, the court may order the submission to any of them of any additional cases, within the respective powers of each division as provided in said Act, and in pursuance thereof this court resolved on January 9, 1933 that in addition to the criminal cases assigned by law to the First Division, the said division should consider and decide land registration cases, cases of ejectment and possession of real property, habeas corpus proceedings, and extraordinary legal remedies relating of criminal cases.


D E C I S I O N


VICKERS, J.:


This case was assigned to the First Division, and was argued before that division and submitted without objection on the part of counsel for either party. In due course it was considered and decided by a division of three justices of the First Division, but upon motion of the attorney for the defendant the decision was set aside, because it was found that upon computing the amount of rent and other claims allowed the defendant by the lower court the total was in excess of P10,000. It is now suggested by the attorney for the defendant that the case should, because of its nature, be assigned to the Second Division. We do not agree with that suggestion, because Act No. 4023 provides that in order to attain an equal distribution of cases between the different divisions, whether of five judges or three judges, the court may order the submission to any of them of any additional cases, within the respective powers of each division as provided in said Act, and in pursuance thereof this court resolved on January 9, 1933 that in addition to the criminal cases assigned by law to the First Division, the said division should consider and decide land registration cases, cases of ejectment and possession of real property, habeas corpus proceedings, and extraordinary legal remedies relating to criminal cases.

Plaintiff brought this action as administrator of the estate of the deceased Marcelo de Borja to recover the possession of the building at No. 1551 Azcarraga Street, Manila, and rent therefor at P30 a month from June 1st, 1921 to November 30th, 1927, and at the rate of P50 a month from December 1st, 1927, to the date of the restitution of the property.

Defendant denied the allegations of the complaint, and in his last amended answer set up two counterclaims: The first, for the rent of a tinaja factory in San Felipe Neri, Rizal, at P200 a month from the 13th of June, 1922 to the 15th of March, 1932, amounting to P23,400; the second, for P5,082.97 as follows: For the funeral expenses of the deceased Marcelo de Borja in the sum of P200; for firewood furnished the plaintiff, P823.02, and for one-third of the advances made by the defendant for the account of the estate of Marcelo de Borja in connection with the registration and administration of the Hacienda de Jalajala, in which the estate of Marcelo de Borja had an undivided one-third interest, P4,059.93. Plaintiff denied the allegations in the answer, and alleged as special defenses to the two counterclaims that any right of action which the defendant may have had with respect thereto had already prescribed; and that the claims of the defendant had already been litigated and disallowed, and were therefore res adjudicata, with the exception of the item of P4,059.93 for advances in connection with the Hacienda de Jalajala.

At the trial of the case the defendant maintained that his father, Francisco de Borja, was occupying the building at 1551 Azcarraga Street, Manila, and that he, the defendant, had no liability therefor. The lower court found, however, that the building in question was occupied by the defendant, and that he was liable to the plaintiff for rent therefor at the rate of P30 a month; that the rent had been paid by the defendant up to January 31, 1927.

The lower court overruled plaintiff’s defenses to defendant’s counterclaims, and ordered the plaintiff to pay the defendant P200 a month for the tinaja factory from December 7, 1927 to March 15, 1932; P200 for the funeral expenses of Marcelo de Borja; and the sum of P4,059.93 for advances made by the defendant on account of the expenses of registration and administration of the Hacienda de Jalajala. Both parties appealed.

Plaintiff alleges that the lower court erred: (1) "All considerar las pruebas del demandado Jose de Borja mas dignas de fe que las pruebas presentadas por el demandate Quintin de Borja; (2) al declarar que los alquileres de la finca No. 1551 de la calle Azcarraga, Ciudad de Manila, ahora en cuestion, eran P30 al mes solamente, hasta la fecha, no obstante las pruebas concluyentes del damandante de que dichos alquieleres se habian aumentado de P30 a P50 al mes, desde el dia 1.
Top of Page