Title
Manahan, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 111656
Decision Date
Mar 20, 1996
A man is acquitted of the crime of estafa but held civilly liable for the value of a lost truck after subleasing it without consent, as the Supreme Court determines that there was no evidence of misappropriation or conversion.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 111656)

Facts:

  • Petitioner: Manuel L. Manahan, Jr.
  • Respondents: Court of Appeals and the People of the Philippines.
  • Events:
    • On May 10, 1976, Manahan entered into an Equipment Lease Agreement with IFC Leasing and Acceptance Corporation (IFC) for an Isuzu dump truck.
    • Lease terms included a 36-month period with a monthly rental of P3,541.20 and an initial deposit of P24,000.00.
    • On September 16, 1976, a second lease agreement was made for a Kimco Hough JH65CN Payloader for 48 months at a monthly rental of P5,311.80.
  • Complaint:
    • IFC filed a complaint on March 15, 1977, for unpaid rentals totaling P160,110.18 (dump truck) and P249,975.44 (payloader).
    • The court ruled in favor of IFC on April 3, 1978, but IFC did not execute the decision immediately.
  • Demand and Charges:
    • On June 23, 1981, IFC demanded the return of the equipment.
    • Manahan failed to return the dump truck, leading to an estafa charge filed on March 15, 1983.
  • Trial Court Decision:
    • The Regional Trial Court of Makati found Manahan guilty of estafa on July 27, 1989, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty and ordering indemnification to IFC.
  • Appeal:
    • Manahan appealed, but the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision with a penalty modification on May 21, 1993.
  • Supreme Court Review:
    • Manahan sought a review from the Supreme Court.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  1. The Supreme Court acquitted Manahan of the crime of estafa.
  2. The Supreme Court held Manahan civilly liable for the value of the lost dump truck amounting to P55,000...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • Violation of Lease Contract:
    • Manahan violated the lease contract by subletting the dump truck without IFC's consent, but this did not constitute estafa.
  • Elements of Estafa:
    • The essential elements include receipt of personal property with an obligation to return it, conversion or misappropriation of the property, injury to another, and a demand for return.
  • Lack of Criminal Intent:
    • Manahan's default on returning the truck and efforts to recover it from the sublessee, Gorospe, negated the criminal intent required for estafa.
    • Estafa requires criminal intent, which was not present in this case.
  • Civil Liability:
    • Manahan&...continue reading

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.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.