Title
Manila Trading and Supplying Co. vs. Reyes
Case
G.R. No. 43263
Decision Date
Oct 31, 1935
A case challenging Act No. 4122's constitutionality, which bars vendors from recovering unpaid balances after foreclosure in installment sales, upheld by the Supreme Court as valid and fair.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 43263)

Facts:

  • Nature of the case and sole question presented
  • The Court resolved only the question of the validity of Act No. 4122, known as the Installment Sales Law.
  • Text and operation of Act No. 4122
  • Act No. 4122 amended the Civil Code by inserting a new section, Section 1454-A, between Sections 1454 and 1455.
  • Under Section 1454-A, when a contract for the sale of personal property payable in installments involved failure to pay two or more installments, the vendor obtained the right:
1) to cancel the sale; or 2) to foreclose the mortgage, if one had been given on the property; 3) without reimbursement to the purchaser of installments already paid, if there was an agreement to this effect.
  • Under the same section, if the vendor chose to foreclose the mortgage:
1) the vendor had no further action against the purchaser for recovery of any unpaid balance; and 2) any agreement to the contrary was null and void.
  • The same rule applied to leases of personal property with option to purchase, when the lessor chose to deprive the lessee of the enjoyment of such personal property.
  • Undisputed factual antecedents
  • On December 13, 1933, after the enactment of Act No. 4122, E. M. Reyes executed a chattel mortgage on an automobile in favor of Manila Trading & Supply Co.
  • The chattel mortgage secured payment of PHP 400, payable in ten equal monthly installments.
  • Reyes failed to pay some of the installments due.
  • Manila Trading & Supply Co. proceeded to foreclose the chattel mortgage.
  • The mortgaged automobile was sold at public auction by the sheriff of the City of Manila for PHP 200.
  • After applying the sale price, together with interest, costs, and liquidated damages, to Reyes’s indebtedness, Reyes still owed a deficiency balance of PHP 275.47, with interest at twelve percent per annum from February 19, 1934.
  • When Reyes failed to pay the deficiency, Manila Trading & Supply Co. filed an action in the Court of First Instance of Manila for recovery of the deficiency.
  • Reyes answered and raised as defense that the plaintiff, having chosen to foreclose the chattel mortgage, had no further action for recovery of the unpaid balance under Act No. 4122.
  • After trial, the lower court sustained the defense and rendered judgment absolving Reyes from the complaint, with costs.
  • Manila Trading & Supply Co. appealed, contending that Act No. 4122 was unconstitutional.
  • Grounds relied upon by the appellant for unconstitutionality
  • The appellant argued that Act No. 4122 was unconstitutional for four rea...(Subscriber-Only)

Issues:

  • Constitutional questions raised by the appellant
  • Whether Act No. 4122 was void for embracing more than one subject, in alleged violation of section 3 of the Organic Act (Act of Congress of August 29, 1916).
  • Whether Act No. 4122 unduly restrained liberty of contract concerning property rights.
  • Whether Act No. 4122 constituted class legislation.
  • Whether Act No. 4122 denied vendors and lessors equal protection of the laws.
  • Validity of the title under the “single subject” requirement
  • Whether Act No. 4122’s tit...(Subscriber-Only)

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.