Case Digest (G.R. No. 11008)
Facts:
- The case involves a dispute over the return of money following a property sale under execution.
- Plaintiffs: Mariano Real and others; Defendant: Cesareo Mallari.
- Mallari appealed a judgment from the Court of First Instance of Manila.
- A public sale of land occurred on February 16, 1912.
- Mallari made a payment of P 1,026 to the sheriff on February 14, 1913, covering execution balance, taxes, and purchase price.
- The payment was voluntary and made without claims for reduction due to property occupation.
- On April 30, 1913, Mallari requested the return of P 336, claiming it was for the value of use and occupation from the sale date until payment.
- Mallari formally moved to compel the sheriff for the return of P 336 on February 4, 1915, nearly two years later.
- The trial court denied this motion, prompting Mallari's appeal.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's judgment, denying the defendant's motion to ...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The Supreme Court ruled that the voluntary payment made by the defendant to the sheriff absolved the sheriff from further responsibility.
- The payment was made without any objections or claims regarding property use and occupation at the time.
- The sheriff delivered the payment to the rig...continue reading
Case Digest (G.R. No. 11008)
Facts:
The case of Mariano Real et al. vs. Cesareo Mallari revolves around a dispute regarding the return of a sum of money following a property sale under execution. The plaintiffs, Mariano Real and others, filed a case against the defendant, Cesareo Mallari, who appealed a judgment from the Court of First Instance of Manila. The events leading to the case began with a public sale of land that occurred on February 16, 1912. Following this sale, Mallari, the execution debtor, made a payment of P 1,026 to the sheriff on February 14, 1913. This payment included the balance due on the execution, taxes on the land, and the purchase price of the property, along with the appropriate interest. Notably, this payment was made voluntarily and without any claim for a reduction due to the use and occupation of the property by the assignee of the purchaser.
On April 30, 1913, Mallari demanded the return of P 336 from the sheriff, claiming it represented the reasonable value of the use and occupation of the premises from the da...