Facts:

The case involves Cirilo Abella as the plaintiff and Mariano Gonzaga as the defendant. The events leading to the case began with a contract of lease dated April 15, 1921, wherein Gonzaga, the landowner, leased a parcel of land located in San Felipe Neri to Abella for a period of five years, from March 5, 1921, to March 5, 1926. The annual rent was set at P1,114.34, payable in advance on March 5 of each year. The contract included a provision that upon the termination of the lease, Gonzaga would transfer full ownership of the property to Abella, provided that the latter had made all the required payments. Abella paid an initial sum of P1,392.92 and was to pay the remaining rent in installments.

However, Gonzaga contended that Abella failed to comply with the payment schedule, as the last payment was made on March 27, 1927, over a year after it was due. The case was brought before the Court of First Instance of Rizal, where both parties presented evidence. The court ruled in...

Facts:

Parties Involved

• Plaintiff and Appellee: Cirilo Abella
• Defendant and Appellant: Mariano Gonzaga

Contract Details

• Date of Contract: April 15, 1921
• Nature of Contract: Titled as a "Special Contract of Lease"
• Key Terms:
  • Duration: 5 years (March 5, 1921, to March 5, 1926)
  • Rent: P1,114.34 per annum, payable in advance on March 5 each year
  • Transfer of Ownership: Upon full payment of rent, the defendant agreed to transfer full ownership of the land to the plaintiff free of charge.
  • Additional Costs: Surveying, boundary fixing, title registration, and other expenses were to be borne by the plaintiff.
  • Penalties: Failure to comply with any stipulation would result in the plaintiff losing all amounts paid and forfeiting any rights under the contract.

Dispute

• The plaintiff paid the last installment on March 27, 1927, over a year after the due date (March 5, 1926).
• The defendant argued that the plaintiff violated the contract by delaying the payment and, therefore, had no right to demand the transfer of ownership.
• The plaintiff sought specific performance of the contract, demanding the transfer of the land.

Agreed Statement of Facts

• The defendant had purchased 70 parcels of land from the Mandaluyong Estate, including the land in question (Lot No. 9).
• The defendant had mortgaged the land to Messrs. Whitaker and Ortigas, and the land was still subject to this mortgage at the time of the case.
• The outstanding balance on the mortgage was P21,002.69 as of December 31, 1929.

Issue:

1. Whether the contract between the plaintiff and defendant is a lease or a sale on installments.
2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to specific performance, i.e., the transfer of ownership of the land, despite the delayed payment.
3. Whether the defendant is obligated to redeem the mortgage on the land before transferring ownership to the plaintiff.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

The court affirmed the trial court's decision, ruling in favor of the plaintiff and requiring the defendant to redeem the mortgage and transfer ownership of the land to the plaintiff. Costs were also awarded against the defendant.