Title
Beltran vs. People's Homesite and Housing Corporation
Case
G.R. No. L-25138
Decision Date
Aug 28, 1969
Residents of Project 4 filed an interpleader suit against PHHC and GSIS over conflicting ownership claims. Court dismissed the case, ruling no conflicting claims against plaintiffs existed.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-25138)

Facts:

  • Background of the Case: The plaintiffs, Jose A. Beltran and other residents of Project 4 in Quezon City, filed an interpleader suit on August 21, 1962, against the People's Homesite & Housing Corporation (PHHC) and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS). They sought to compel the two government corporations to litigate their conflicting claims over Project 4.
  • Lease and Purchase Agreement: Since 1953, the plaintiffs had occupied housing units in Project 4 under a lease agreement with PHHC, paying monthly rentals. They were assured that after five years of continuous occupancy, they could purchase the units.
  • Transfer of Ownership: On February 21, 1961, PHHC announced that Project 4 would be transferred to GSIS to settle PHHC's debts. Tenants were offered the option to purchase their units, with 30% of their past rentals credited as a down payment. The tenants accepted this offer.
  • PHHC-GSIS Agreement: On December 27, 1961, PHHC and GSIS executed a turnover agreement, transferring the administration and ownership of Project 4 to GSIS. However, PHHC's new Chairman-General Manager, Esmeraldo Eco, later refused to recognize the agreement, while GSIS insisted on enforcing it.
  • Plaintiffs' Dilemma: The plaintiffs claimed they were unsure whether to pay their monthly amortizations to PHHC or GSIS, causing them inconvenience and damage. They preferred GSIS to handle the sale, as most were GSIS policyholders.
  • Trial Court's Order: On August 23, 1962, the trial court designated the People's First Savings Bank to receive the tenants' payments in trust. However, on September 6, 1962, the court dismissed the complaint, finding no cause of action for interpleader since both defendants agreed that payments should be made to PHHC.

Issue:

  1. Whether the plaintiffs' complaint for interpleader stated a valid cause of action.
  2. Whether the conflicting claims between PHHC and GSIS affected the plaintiffs' rights to pay their monthly amortizations.
  3. Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint based on the defendants' agreement that payments should be made to PHHC.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.