Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26768)
Facts:
Faustino Gojo, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. Segundo Goyala and Antonina Almoguera, Respondents-Appellees, G.R. No. L-26768, October 30, 1970, the Supreme Court En Banc, Barredo, J., writing for the Court.
In May 1951, Segundo Goyala and his wife Antonina Almoguera executed a document denominated a "Deed of Pacto de Retro Sale" conveying an agricultural parcel (about two and one-half hectares) to Faustino Gojo for P750.00, with a repurchase period of one year; the deed shows an additional payment (noted in the record) soon thereafter. On July 4, 1951, the vendee allegedly paid another P100.00; in defense pleadings the Goyalas later characterized the transactions as loans aggregating P810.00 secured by the instrument.
On April 12, 1961, Gojo (the vendee) filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon for consolidation of ownership on the ground that the period for repurchase had expired. On May 26, 1961, Segundo Goyala answered, denied the pacto characterization, and asserted the instrument was in truth a mortgage securing a loan; he alleged tender of P810.00 on May 26, 1952 which Gojo refused to accept, and set up a counterclaim praying, among other reliefs, that the instrument be declared a mortgage, cancelled, or, alternatively, that Gojo be ordered to execute a deed of resale under Article 1606 (third paragraph) of the Civil Code.
Counsel for Goyala later notified the trial court that Antonina had died (March 27, 1959) and identified her heirs. Instead of ordering substitution under Rule 3, Section 17 of the Rules of Court, the trial court on December 4, 1962 required Gojo to file an amended complaint substituting the heirs for the deceased defendant. Gojo received the order but failed to file the amended complaint within the reglementary time. On January 26, 1963 Goyala moved to dismiss the petition; on February 15, 1963 the trial court dismissed Gojo's complaint without prejudice for failure to submit the amended complaint.
Thereafter Goyala moved to have Gojo declared in default on the counterclaim; the trial court granted the motion on July 11, 1963, commissioned the Clerk of Court to receive the defendant's evidence, and, after presentation of evidence, rendered judgment on November 15, 1963 declaring the Deed of Pacto de Retro Sale an equitable mortgage, permitting redemption by the Goyalas, ordering withdrawal by Gojo of P810.00 deposited with the Clerk in settlement, and cance...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in declaring the plaintiff (Gojo) in default with respect to the defendant's (Goyala's) counterclaim.
- Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the plaintiff's complaint for failure to file an amended complaint to substitute heirs for the deceased defendant.
- Whether the trial court erred in deputizing the Clerk of Court to receive the defendant's evidence and in rendering judgment for the...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)