Title
Spouses Bella vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 105997
Decision Date
Sep 26, 1997
The Supreme Court confirms the liability of the spouses Bella to Industrial Finance Corporation, affirming the trial court's penalty of 2% per month despite the spouses' objections to IFC's late answer.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. 105997)

Facts:

  • Petitioners: Spouses Mario and Carmelita Bella.
  • Respondents: Court of Appeals, Industrial Finance Corporation (IFC), and Benjamin Untog.
  • On April 27, 1978, Mario Bella purchased an Isuzu Gemini car from GM Automart Corporation.
  • He executed a Deed of Sale with Chattel Mortgage, a Promissory Note, and a Disclosure of Loan/Credit Transaction for P53,390.88, payable in 36 monthly installments of P1,483.08.
  • The Promissory Note included a 3% monthly penalty for default and 20% attorney's fees on the total amount due.
  • The car was delivered to Mario Bella, who signed the delivery receipt.
  • GM Automart Corporation assigned its rights under the Promissory Note to IFC.
  • Mario Bella made 14 payments from August 26, 1978, to October 18, 1979, but defaulted, owing P32,834.60 by December 25, 1979.
  • IFC filed a complaint for a sum of money against the spouses on January 22, 1980.
  • The spouses filed a third-party complaint against Benjamin Untog.
  • The Regional Trial Court ruled in favor of IFC on May 31, 1988, ordering the spouses to pay P25,212.30 without interest, plus a 2% monthly penalty and P4,000 in attorney's fees; the third-party complaint was dismissed.
  • The Court of Appeals modified the decision on July 15, 1991, increasing the amount owed to P32,725.61 but maintaining the penalty.
  • The spouses' motion for reconsideration was denied on June 19, 1992.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court partially granted the petition, modifying the Court of Appeals' decision.
  • Petitioners were ordered to pay IFC P25,212.30, with a 2% monthly penalty from January 8, 1980, and P4,000 in attorney's fees.
  • The Court upheld the trial court&#...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court found sufficient basis for the trial court's ruling, as the promissory note and chattel mortgage were duly signed by Mario Bella, establishing his obligation.
  • The assessment of evidence and determination of the amount owed were factual matters best left to the trial court.
  • Claims regarding IFC's failure to prove the obligation and alleged misapprehension of facts were deemed matters of...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.