Title
Villasi vs. Garcia
Case
G.R. No. 190106
Decision Date
Jan 15, 2014
Villasi sued FGCI over unpaid construction billings. CA ruled Villasi overpaid; execution levied FGCI-owned building. SC reversed, allowing sale as Spouses Garcia failed to prove ownership; tax declarations supported FGCI’s claim.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 1002)

Facts:

  • Contract and initial collection suit
    • In 1990, Magdalena T. Villasi engaged Fil-Garcia Construction, Inc. (FGCI) to build a seven-storey condominium in Cubao, Quezon City, for a contract price.
    • Villasi allegedly failed to pay P2,865,000.00 of the accomplishment billings. FGCI filed Civil Case No. Q-91-8187 before the RTC of Quezon City, Branch 77, praying for unpaid billings.
  • RTC Decision and appellate proceedings
    • On 26 June 1996, the RTC rendered judgment in favor of FGCI ordering Villasi to pay:
      • P2,865,000.00 as unpaid accomplishment billings;
      • P500,000.00 for unused building materials;
      • P100,000.00 as moral damages; and
      • P100,000.00 as attorney’s fees.
    • FGCI appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA CV-No. 54750). On 20 November 2000, the CA reversed and set aside the RTC decision, holding that Villasi had made an overpayment and ordering FGCI to return:
      • P1,244,543.33 as overpayment;
      • P425,004.00 for construction materials; and
      • Liquidated damages at 1/10 of 1% of the contract price per day of delay.
  • Supreme Court petition and execution writ
    • FGCI’s petition for certiorari (G.R. No. 147960) was denied for late filing by this Court on 1 October 2001; the entry of judgment became final on 27 November 2001.
    • Villasi moved for execution of the CA’s 20 November 2000 decision. On 28 April 2004, the RTC issued a writ of execution.
  • Levy on property and third-party claim
    • The deputy sheriff levied on a building at No. 140 Kalayaan Avenue (TCT Nos. 379193 & 379194), declared for taxation in FGCI’s name, though the lots were registered in the names of Spouses Filomeno Garcia and Ermelinda Halili-Garcia.
    • After posting and publication, a public auction was set for 25 January 2006. The Spouses Garcia filed an affidavit of third-party claim (terceria) and a motion to set aside notice of sale, asserting ownership of the property.
    • On 24 February 2005, the RTC suspended the sale; the RTC denied Villasi’s motion for reconsideration on 11 October 2005. Villasi’s certiorari petition to the CA was dismissed on 19 May 2009; the CA denied reconsideration on 28 October 2009.
  • Present petition
    • Villasi filed this Rule 45 petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the CA’s decision and resolution.

Issues:

  • Whether the Court of Appeals grievously erred in upholding the RTC’s suspension of the sale on execution based on the Spouses Garcia’s affidavit of third-party claim.
  • Whether the CA erred in holding there was no basis to pierce the veil of FGCI’s corporate fiction.
  • Whether the Branch Sheriff should be directed to file the appropriate notice of levy with the Register of Deeds of Quezon City.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (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.