Wednesday, July 8, 2009

13th Case

Civil Law: Law on Sales

David vs. Tiongson

A complaint for specific performance was lodge in RTC against Sp. Tiongson and Sps. Ventura and David, and Florencia Vda. De Basco as complainants. The complaint alleged that they bought a parcel of land from the respondents with an agreement that the latter shall execute the necessary deed of sale after full payment of the purchase price. In the trial court, the defendants were in default hence the judgment was in favor of complainant. However, when elevated, the CA reversed the ruling for Sp. David and Florencia Vda. De Basco. The CA affirmed the ruling in the case of Sp. Ventura. It was alleged by Tiongson that the complainants had actually not paid the full amount and they were in arrears. The CA said that there was no perfected contract of sale with Sp. David and Florencia Basco. DAVID- CA said there was a conflicting claim as to the agreed price hence no meeting of the minds. BASCO- the lot sold could not be specifically determined or identified by the parties.
SC: DAVID- We disagree. The question to be determined should not be whether there was an agreed price, but what that agreed price was, whether for a total of 15k as claimed by the Davids or 120 per sq.meter as alleged by Tiongson. The seller could not render invalid a perfected contract of sale by merely contradicting the buyers’ allegation regarding the price, and subsequently raising the lack of agreement as to the price. It is the fact that Davids had religiously paying the price for a total of 15050.
BASCO- We disagree. We find that the 109sq.m. lot was adequately described in the receipt, or at least can be easily determinable. The receipt issued on June 4, 1983 stated that the lot being purchased by Florencia was one earlier earmarked for her sister. Any mistake in the designation of the lots does not vitiate the consent of the parties or effect the validity and binding effect of the contract of sale. Ruling is REVERSED.