G.R. No. L-49852 - Tengco vs. Court of Appeals

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-49852)

Factual Background

Emilia Tengco alleged that she had entered into a verbal lease in 1942 with Lutgarda Cifra for the premises in question and had paid rentals to a collector who made irregular demands at her residence. The private respondent, Benjamin Cifra, Jr., claimed ownership of the parcel and avowed that petitioner defaulted in rental payments beginning February, 1974. A demand to vacate was made on August 23, 1976, and the complaint for Unlawful Detainer was filed on September 16, 1976. Petitioner asserted that she proffered payment at the collector's residence after receiving a demand letter but that payment was refused. Petitioner also received a prior communication in May, 1976, informing her of the private respondent's claim of ownership and offering the property for sale.

Municipal Court Judgment

The Municipal Court of Navotas found for the plaintiff and ordered the defendant to vacate the premises at No. 164 Int., Gov. Pascual Street, Navotas, to surrender possession, to pay arrears of rental in the amount of THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY SIX (P376.00) PESOS, to pay TWELVE PESOS (P12.00) a month from October, 1976 until the premises was vacated, and to pay TWO HUNDRED (P200.00) PESOS as attorney's fees and costs of suit.

Appeal to the Court of First Instance

The petitioner appealed to the Court of First Instance of Rizal, docketed as Civil Case No. C-6625. On May 18, 1978, the Court of First Instance affirmed the decision of the municipal court in toto, without pronouncement as to costs.

Petition to the Court of Appeals

The petitioner filed an "Appeal by Way of Certiorari" with the Court of Appeals, docketed as CA-G.R. NO. SP-08182. On August 29, 1978, the Court of Appeals denied the petition, finding that the decision of the lower court was supported by substantial evidence and that its conclusions were not clearly against law and jurisprudence; the Court of Appeals' disposition stated that the petition was "denied due course and is dismissed outright." The Court of Appeals denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration on January 16, 1979.

Petitioner's Contentions on Review

On certiorari, Emilia Tengco advanced five principal contentions: that Benjamin Cifra, Jr. was not the owner of the leased premises; that the lessor was guilty of mora accipiendi in refusing tendered rentals; that her version of the facts was more credible than the private respondent's; that laches had deprived the lessor of the right to eject her; and that the private respondent failed to establish a cause of action for unlawful detainer.

Court of Appeals' Analysis and Findings

The Court of Appeals treated the petition as a review of factual findings and sustained the lower courts. The appellate court noted petitioner's admission that she was a lessee and that she had been in default since February, 1974, and emphasized that the identity of the lessor and ownership of the lot were questions of fact within the province of the trial court. The Court of Appeals held that a tenant may not controvert the title of the landlord at the commencement of the tenancy and that the trial court's factual findings were binding absent material contrary evidence. The Court rejected petitioner's reliance on Section 1, Commonwealth Act No. 53, observing that that provision applies only to disputes as to the terms of an unwritten contract or where the contract is in a language not understood by the lessee; no such dispute on terms existed in this case. The appellate court further ruled that petitioner's excuse of refusal of payment merited little weight because, if payment was refused, she should have resorted to judicial deposit to discharge her obligation under Article 1256, Civil Code. Regarding mora accipiendi, the Court found that ownership had transferred to Benjamin Cifra, Jr., the person to whom petitioner should have tendered payment, and that an unrecorded lease executed by a vendor ceases to have effect upon sale of the property in the absence of a contrary agreement, citing Saul vs. Hawkins. Finally, the Court held that laches did not bar the action because the demand to vacate was made on August 23, 1976 and the complaint was filed on September 16, 1976, and because a lessor may waive formal enforcement and give credit to a tenant until he elects to convert legal possession into illegal possession by making demand.

Supreme Court's Resolution and Reasoning

The Supreme Court reviewed the record and found no merit in the petition. The Court adopted the reasoning of the Court of Appeals and affirmed that the question of ownership was factual and that the lower courts' findings were supported by the eviden

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. L-49852)

Parties and Procedural Posture

EMILIA TENGCO, PETITIONER, VS. COURT OF APPEALS AND BENJAMIN CIFRA, JR., RESPONDENTS described the parties and the procedural history before the Supreme Court.
Benjamin Cifra, Jr. filed an action for unlawful detainer in the Municipal Court of Navotas, Metro Manila, docketed as Civil Case No. 2092, seeking possession and arrears in rentals.
The Municipal Court rendered judgment ordering the defendant to vacate the premises at No. 164 Int., Gov. Pascual St., Navotas, to pay P376.00 as rentals in arrears, P12.00 per month from October 1976 until vacatur, and P200.00 as attorney’s fees and costs.
Emilia Tengco appealed to the Court of First Instance of Rizal, which affirmed the municipal court judgment in Civil Case No. C-6625 on 18 May 1978.
Emilia Tengco filed an "Appeal by Way of Certiorari" with the Court of Appeals, docketed CA-G.R. No. SP-08182, which dismissed the petition on 29 August 1978 and denied reconsideration on 16 January 1979.
The petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court sought review of the Court of Appeals decision and its denial of reconsideration.

Key Factual Allegations

Emilia Tengco admitted that she was a lessee of the premises and that she had been in default in the payment of rentals since February 1974.
The original lessor was alleged to be Lutgarda Cifra, with rentals previously collected by a collector who visited the tenant’s residence intermittently.
The collector ceased coming in 1974, after which the tenant retained the funds pending collection and alleged subsequent refusal to accept tendered payments in 1976.
Emilia Tengco received a letter in May 1976 from Aurora C. Recto advising that Benjamin Cifra, Jr. claimed ownership and offered the property for sale, and she later received a demand from Benjamin Cifra, Jr. to surrender possession.
The demand to vacate was made on 23 August 1976, and the unlawful detainer complaint was filed on 16 September 1976.
The lease was verbal and unrecorded, and the private respondent produced a Certificate of Title referring to a parcel at Bo. Almacen while the tenant claimed the premises were in Bo. Sipak.

Issues Presented

Whether Benjamin Cifra, Jr. established ownership of the leased premises.
Whether the lessor was guilty of mora accipiendi for allegedly refusing to accept tendered rentals.
Whether the petitioner’s version of the facts was more credible than the private respondent’s.
Whether laches barred the lessor from ejecting the tenant.
Whether the private respondent established a cause of action for unlawful detainer.

Contentions of the Parties

Emilia Tengco contended that Benjamin Cifra, Jr. was not the owner of the premises, that the lease was with his mother, that the collector’s refusal excused nonpayment, that laches deprived the lessor of his right to eject, and that no cause of action wa