Case Digest (G.R. No. L-6289)
Facts:
Jose M. Arroyo, as Attorney in Fact of Ignacio Arroyo v. Matias Granada and Celedonia Gentero, G.R. No. 6289. March 02, 1911, the Supreme Court En Banc, Moreland, J., writing for the Court.The litigation arose from a debt originally owed by Felix Granada to Bias Gerona. Both Felix Granada and Bias Gerona had died; Ignacio Arroyo was the administrator of Gerona’s estate and pursued collection. An amicable settlement executed October 3, 1905, acknowledged an indebtedness of P2,261, payable P1,000 in March 1906 and P1,261 in March 1907. When the March 1906 payment was not made, a mortgage dated April 14, 1906, secured P1,000 (with 12% interest) over about 130 cavanes in Hinigaran.
When the combined obligation matured in 1907 without payment, J. M. Arroyo, son of Ignacio and holding a full power of attorney, went to the father’s hacienda to arrange settlements. On May 23–25, 1907 (dates in dispute), Matias Granada proposed transferring some thirty-four hectares of land in satisfaction of the debt, representing it as “first quality” and adjacent to lands in Cumansi that Ignacio Arroyo had acquired from Narciso Borja. According to the plaintiff’s witnesses, J. M. Arroyo initially objected but accepted the representation and prepared a cancellation of the indebtedness and gave Matias a form deed with blanks to be filled and returned after execution by Matias’s mother, Celedonia Gentero. Defendants contended that J. M. Arroyo inspected the land, accompanied Matias to Isabela, dictated and signed the transfer before a notary (Rosauro Barroquina), and acknowledged the cancellation there.
After the transfer, plaintiff sent agents to take possession and discovered the parcel was largely wooded and flooded, of inferior quality (third or fourth class) rather than first-class arable land. Ignacio Arroyo, through his son as attorney-in-fact named plaintiff Jose M. Arroyo, sued to set aside the deed for fraudulent misrepresentations and to recover the P2,381 with interest. The Court of First Instance of Occidental Negros found the documents executed by means of false and fraudulent representations and ordered their annulment and cancellation in favor o...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Procedural: Can Jose M. Arroyo, sued as plaintiff in his capacity as apoderado (attorney-in-fact) of Ignacio Arroyo, properly maintain this action in his own name?
- Substantive: Was there sufficient evidence of fraud or false and fraudulent representations to annul and cancel the deed...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)