Title
Abella vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 107606
Decision Date
Jun 20, 1996
Lessee paid P40K advance deposit for rentals; lessor improperly rescinded lease, demolished improvements. SC ruled lessee not in breach, ordered refund and compensation for improvements. Lease term expired, possession moot.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 94457)

Facts:

Mercedes N. Abella v. The Honorable Court of Appeals and Conrado Colarina, G.R. No. 107606, June 20, 1996, Supreme Court Third Division, Francisco, J., writing for the Court.

Petitioner Mercedes N. Abella (lessor) and private respondent Conrado Colarina (lessee) executed a lease on May 26, 1987 for a portion of the Juanabel Building in Naga City, purportedly for the period July 1, 1987 to July 1, 1991, with monthly rent of P3,000. Upon signing, Colarina paid Abella P40,000, for which Abella issued a written receipt. Colarina made improvements to the premises (mezzanine, toilet, phone lines, electric lights) costing about P68,000. He regularly paid rent but ceased payments from November 1987 to April 1988.

Abella served repeated demands and, invoking paragraph 13 of the lease (an extrajudicial rescission clause), took possession of the premises on May 1, 1988 with assistance from the Naga City police and barangay officials, who inventoried items found on the premises. On May 5, 1988, Colarina sued Abella in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 25, Naga City, for enforcement of the lease with preliminary mandatory injunction and damages.

After trial the RTC ordered Abella to return the P40,000 less unpaid rental aggregating P18,000 (November–April), i.e., P22,000, and to return the demolished/removed improvements to Colarina; the RTC also dismissed the case for lack of merit. The Court of Appeals (First Division) reversed: it ordered Abella to restore possession to Colarina under the lease terms, to restore or pay for the P68,000 worth of improvements with interest, and to pay costs. Aggrieved, Abella filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court raising five errors that centered on (1)...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Did respondent Conrado Colarina breach the lease such that petitioner Abella could validly effect extrajudicial rescission on May 1, 1988?
  • If rescission was improper, should possession of the premises be restored...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.